Wilson v. United Insurance Co. of America

209 S.W.3d 538, 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 1981, 2006 WL 3783130
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals
DecidedDecember 26, 2006
DocketNo. ED 88864
StatusPublished

This text of 209 S.W.3d 538 (Wilson v. United Insurance Co. of America) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Wilson v. United Insurance Co. of America, 209 S.W.3d 538, 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 1981, 2006 WL 3783130 (Mo. Ct. App. 2006).

Opinion

BOOKER T. SHAW, Chief Judge.

Sadiyyah Wilson (Claimant) appeals from the decision of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission affirming the Appeals Tribunal’s decision denying her claim for unemployment compensation. The Division of Employment Security (Division) has filed a motion to dismiss Claimant’s appeal because her notice of appeal to this Court is untimely. Claimant has not filed a response to the motion.

In unemployment cases, the notice of appeal from the Commission’s decision is due within twenty days of the Commission’s decision becoming final. Section 288.210, RSMo 2000. The Commission’s decision becomes final ten days after it is mailed to the parties. Section 288.200.2, RSMo 2000. Here, the Commission mailed its decision to Claimant on September 27, 2006. Therefore, her notice of appeal was due on October 27, 2006. Sections 288.200.2, 288.210.

The Commission received Claimant’s notice of appeal in an envelope postmarked October 30, 2006, and it is deemed filed on that date. Section 288.240, RSMo 2000. Claimant’s notice of appeal is untimely. The unemployment statutes make [539]*539no provision for late filing of a notice of appeal. Phillips v. Clean-Tech, 34 S.W.3d 854, 855 (Mo.App. E.D.2000). As a result, an untimely notice of appeal deprives this Court of jurisdiction to entertain the appeal and our only recourse is to dismiss it. Watkins v. De Van Sealants, Inc., 194 S.W.3d 873, 874 (Mo.App. E.D.2006).

The Division’s motion to dismiss is granted. Claimant’s appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

GLENN A. NORTON and PATRICIA L. COHEN, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Phillips v. Clean-Tech
34 S.W.3d 854 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2000)
Watkins v. De Van Sealants, Inc.
194 S.W.3d 873 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
209 S.W.3d 538, 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 1981, 2006 WL 3783130, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wilson-v-united-insurance-co-of-america-moctapp-2006.