Sheron Huntley, Claimant/Appellant v. Sonic Drive-In 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: Sheron Huntley, Claimant/Appellant v. Sonic Drive-In and Division of Employment Security, Respondents. Case Number: ED84503 Handdown Date: 08/10/2004 Appeal From: Labor and Industrial Relations Commission Counsel for Appellant: Sheron Huntley Counsel for Respondent: Cynthia A. Quetsch Opinion Summary: In this unemployment case, Sheron Huntley appeals the labor and industrial relations commission's decision affirming the appeals tribunal's dismissal of her case. APPEAL DISMISSED. Division Five holds: This Court lacks jurisdiction to consider Huntley's appeal. Her notice of appeal to this Court was untimely, and there is no mechanism for a late notice of appeal. Citation: Opinion Author: George W. Draper III, Chief Judge Opinion Vote: DISMISSED. Crahan, J., and Norton, J., concur. Opinion:

Sheron Huntley (Claimant) appeals the decision of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (Commission) affirming the Appeals Tribunal's denial of unemployment benefits to her. Because we find the Claimant's notice of appeal is untimely, we dismiss the appeal. A deputy of the Division of Employment Security (Division) concluded Claimant was disqualified from receiving

unemployment benefits for seven weeks because she was discharged from her work for misconduct connected with work. Claimant filed an appeal with the Appeals Tribunal, who dismissed her appeal as untimely. Claimant filed an application for review by the Commission, which affirmed the decision of the Appeals Tribunal. The Secretary of the Commission certified that she mailed a copy of the Commission's decision to Claimant on March 25, 2004. Claimant filed a notice of appeal to this Court on April 28, 2004. The Commission's decision becomes final ten days after the date it is mailed to the parties. Section 288.200.2, RSMo

1. Claimant has twenty days to appeal a final decision of the Commission. Section 288.210, RSMo 2000. Here, the

Secretary for the Commission mailed its decision to Claimant on March 25, 2004. The decision became final ten days later and the notice of appeal was due on Monday, April 26, 2004. Section 288.200; section 288.210; 288.240. Claimant's notice of appeal, which was filed on April 28, 2004, was untimely under section 288.210. This Court has a duty to determine sua sponte whether it has jurisdiction. Williams v. ESI Mail Pharmacy Service, Inc., 103 S.W.3d 848 (Mo. App. E.D. 2003). After reviewing our jurisdiction, we issued an order directing Claimant to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed as untimely. Claimant filed a response indicating her notice of appeal was originally returned to her because she did not put enough postage on it. 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). Unfortunately, section 288.210 fails to make any provision for late filing and does not recognize any exceptions for filing out of time. Phillips v. Clean-Tech, 34 S.W.3d 854, 855 (Mo. App. E.D. 2000). Even though Claimant may have a good excuse for the untimeliness of her appeal, our only recourse is to dismiss her appeal. The 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.