Denise Martin, Appellant v. National Linen and Uniform Company, LLC and Division of Employment Security, Respondents.

This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court. Opinion Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District Case Style: Denise Martin, Appellant v. National Linen and Uniform Company, LLC and Division of Employment Security, Respondents. Case Number: ED86871 Handdown Date: 11/29/2005 Appeal From: Labor and Industrial Relations Commission Counsel for Appellant: Denise Martin, Pro Se Counsel for Respondent: Cynthia A. Quetsch Opinion Summary: Denise Martin appeals from the labor and industrial relations commission's decision denying her unemployment benefits. DISMISSED. Division Five holds: This Court lacks jurisdiction to consider the appeal because the notice of appeal to this Court was untimely and there is no mechanism for a late notice of appeal. Citation: Opinion Author: Glenn A. Norton, Chief Judge Opinion Vote: DISMISSED. Crane, J. and Booker T. Shaw, J., concur. Opinion: Denise Martin (Claimant) appeals from the decision of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission denying her unemployment benefits. Because this Court is without jurisdiction, the appeal is dismissed. A deputy from the Division of Employment Security determined that Claimant was disqualified from receiving

unemployment benefits because she was discharged from work for misconduct connected with her work. Claimant appealed to the Appeals Tribunal, which dismissed her appeal. Claimant then filed an application for review with the Commission, which affirmed the Appeals Tribunal's decision on July 22, 2005. Claimant filed a notice of appeal to this Court on August 23, 2005. The Commission's decision becomes final ten days after it is mailed to the parties. Section 288.200.2, RSMo 2000. A claimant then has twenty days to appeal the Commission's final decision. Section 288.210, RSMo 2000. Here, the Secretary for the Commission mailed its decision to Claimant on July 22, 2005. The decision became final ten days later and Claimant's notice of appeal was due on August 22, 2005. Section 288.200.2; Section 288.210. Claimant filed her notice of appeal on August 23, 2005, which is untimely. This Court has a duty to examine its jurisdiction sua sponte. Crowden v. General Sign Co., 133 S.W.3d 562, 562 (Mo. App. E.D. 2004). We issued an order directing Claimant to show cause why her appeal should not be dismissed. Claimant has not filed a response to the order. Section 288.210 makes no provision for late filing of a notice of appeal. Phillips v. Clean-Tech, 34 S.W.3d 854, 855 (Mo. App. E.D. 2000). An untimely notice of appeal in an unemployment case deprives this Court of jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. Loeffler v. Shop N Save, 121 S.W.2d 261, 261 (Mo. App. E.D. 2003). Claimant's appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Separate Opinion: None This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.