 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Harris v. Pauwell's Transformers6/12/2001
Appeal From: Labor and Industrial Relations Commission
Opinion Vote: DISMISSED.
Gaertner, Sr., P.J., and Draper III, J., concurs.
Opinion:
Appellant Pauwell's Transformers, Inc. appeals the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission's final award affirming an award of permanent total disability in favor of respondent Sharon Harris. Because the notice of appeal fails to comply with the requirements of section 287.495 RSMo 2000, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
The essential facts are not in dispute. On July 19, 1993, Sharon Harris ("Employee") suffered a work-related injury while under the employment of Pauwell's Transformers, Inc. ("Employer"). Employee subsequently filed a workers' compensation claim against Employer. Following a hearing, an administrative law judge ("ALJ") for the Division of Workers' Compensation awarded Employee permanent total disability as well as compensation for unpaid medical expenses and future medical care. Employer timely appealed the ALJ's award to the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission ("Commission") pursuant to section 287.480. On September 29, 2000, the Commission affirmed the ALJ's award.
October 27, 2000, Employer mailed a notice of appeal in an envelope addressed to this court. We received Employer's notice of appeal three days later and, on November 2, 2000, returned the appeal along with a letter advising Employer that its appeal "must be filed with the secretary of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission." On November 3, 2000, Employer filed its notice of appeal with the Commission.
Employee thereafter moved to dismiss Employer's appeal, arguing Employer had filed its notice of appeal with the Commission after the time for appeal had expired under section 287.495. This court granted the motion to dismiss and later granted Employer's motion for rehearing, permitting this appeal to proceed.
Employee contends this court lacks jurisdiction over Employer's appeal as the notice of appeal was filed after the time for appeal had expired. Section 287.495.1 details the procedure for appealing Commission awards and states in relevant part:
The final award of the commission shall be conclusive and binding unless either party to the dispute shall, within thirty days from the date of the final award, appeal the award to the appellate court. The appellate court shall have jurisdiction to review all decisions of the commission pursuant to this chapter where the division has original jurisdiction over the case. . . . Such appeal may be taken by filing notice of appeal with the commission, whereupon the commission shall, under its certificate, return to the court all documents and papers on file in the matter, together with a transcript of the evidence, the findings and award, which shall thereupon become the record of the cause.
In the present appeal, the Commission entered its final award on September 29, 2000. Under section 287.495, Employer had until October 30, 2000 to file its notice appeal with the Commission.
As detailed above, Employer mistakenly filed its notice of appeal directly with this court on October 27, 2000. We returned the appeal, and Employer filed its notice of appeal with the Commission on November 3, 2000, more than thirty days from the date of the Commission's final award. Employer argues its appeal is nonetheless timely because the notice of appeal "is deemed to have been filed [with] the [Commission] when it was mailed [to the court of appeals] on October 27, 2000." We disagree.
Employer relies upon Hoenig v. Corrigan Bros., Inc., 983 S.W.2d 526 (Mo. App. 1998), in support of
Page 1 2 Missouri Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|