Ricardo Franklin, Appellant, v. Autozoners, Inc., and Division of Employment Security, Respondents.
Decision date: November 17, 2009ED93585
Opinion
RICARDO FRANKLIN, ) No. ED93585 ) Claimant/Appellant, ) ) vs. ) Appeal from the Labor and ) Industrial Relations Commission AUTOZONERS, INC., and ) DIVISION OF EMPLOYMENT SECURITY, ) ) FILED: November 17, 2009 Respondents. )
Ricardo Franklin (Claimant) appeals the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission's (Commission) decision denying his application for unemployment benefits. We dismiss the appeal. The Division of Employment Security (Division) concluded that Claimant was ineligible for unemployment benefits. Claimant then appealed to the Commission, which affirmed the decision. Claimant has now filed a notice of appeal to this Court. The Division has filed a motion to dismiss Claimant's appeal, asserting it is untimely. Claimant has not filed a response to the motion. Section 288.210, RSMo 2000, requires that a notice of appeal to this Court from the Commission's decision be filed within twenty days of the decision becoming final. The
2 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 August 3, 2009. Therefore, the notice of appeal to this Court was due on or before September 2, 2009. Sections 288.200.2, 288.210. Claimant mailed the notice of appeal to the Commission in an envelope with a postmark of September 3, 2009, which is deemed the date of the filing of his notice of appeal. Section 288.240, RSMo 2000. Claimant's notice of appeal is untimely. "Section 288.200 RSMo does not provide for late filing and does not recognize any exceptions for filing out of time." McCuin 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 we must dismiss it. Withrow v. Shining Example Floor Maintenance Co., Inc., 277 S.W.3d 302, 303 (Mo. App. E.D. 2009). The Division's motion to dismiss is granted. The appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
__________________________________ KENNETH M. ROMINES, CHIEF JUDGE
NANNETTE A. BAKER, J. and ROY L. RICHTER, J., concur.
Related Opinions
Ronald Wuebbeling, Respondent, vs. Jill Clark, f/k/a Jill Wuebbeling, Appellant.(2016)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern DistrictAugust 9, 2106#ED103501
In re the matter of: A.L.P. and S.H.P., minors; Alicia Smith, Respondent, vs. Lora Martinez, Appellant.(2026)
Supreme Court of MissouriFebruary 24, 2026#SC101121
In re the Marriage of: Stacey L. Noble vs. Bradford R. Noble(2026)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western DistrictFebruary 24, 2026#WD87485
M.D.M, Appellant, v. A.W.S., Respondent.(2026)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern DistrictFebruary 10, 2026#ED113141
In the Interest of: B.W.R., Juvenile P.W.R., Jr. vs. Juvenile Officer(2025)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western DistrictDecember 30, 2025#WD87907