Kennedy v. American Paper Recycling Corp.
| Decision Date | 30 May 2006 |
| Docket Number | No. A05-2142.,A05-2142. |
| Citation | 714 N.W.2d 738 |
| Parties | Theodis KENNEDY, Relator, v. AMERICAN PAPER RECYCLING CORP., Respondent, Department of Employment and Economic Development, Respondent. |
| Court | Minnesota Court of Appeals |
Theodis Kennedy, St. Paul, MN, pro se relator.
American Paper Recycling Corp., St. Paul, MN, for respondent.
Linda A. Holmes, Department of Employment and Economic Development, St. Paul, MN, for respondent Department of Employment and Economic Development.
Considered and decided by HALBROOKS, Presiding Judge; LANSING, Judge; and SHUMAKER, Judge.
Relator argues that the unemployment law judge (ULJ) improperly dismissed his appeal, which was postmarked 31 days after the department's initial disqualification determination. Because the statutory appeal period was 30 days and the department lacked jurisdiction to hear an appeal that was postmarked after the appeal period, we affirm.
Relator Theodis Kennedy applied for unemployment benefits after being discharged from his employment with respondent American Paper Recycling Corp. The department initially determined that relator was disqualified because the discharge was for employment misconduct. The mailing date of the determination of disqualification was July 20, 2005.
The determination of disqualification sent to relator included the department's findings, the determination, and the notice of the right to appeal. In all capital letters, the right to appeal stated that the determination will become final unless an appeal is filed within 30 calendar days from the mailing date. The notice also provided the mailing address for the appeals office and stated that, if mailed, the postmark was determinative of filing by mail. Relator sent a letter postmarked August 20, 2005, requesting an appeal.
The ULJ issued an order dismissing the appeal on the ground that the appeal was not filed within the time period required by law. The order also contained the procedure to request reconsideration. Relator asked for reconsideration in a letter, stating that he had mailed his appeal to a different address "not knowing that they relocated to another address." The ULJ found that the order of dismissal was factually and legally correct and affirmed the dismissal. Relator petitioned for a writ of certiorari.
Does the Department of Employment and Economic Development have jurisdiction over relator's appeal of its determination that relator was discharged for employment misconduct when the appeal was postmarked one day after the appeal period had run?
An agency decision to dismiss an appeal as untimely is a question of law, which we review de novo. Stottler v. Meyers Printing Co., 602 N.W.2d 916, 918 (Minn.App.1999); see also Harms v. Oak Meadows, 619 N.W.2d 201, 202 (Minn.2000) ().
Upon issuing a determination of disqualification for unemployment benefits, the department is required to send a notice to the applicant and employer by mail or electronic transmission. Minn.Stat. § 268.101, subd. 2 (2004). A determination of disqualification "shall be final unless an appeal is filed by the applicant or . . . employer within 30 calendar days after sending." Id., subd. 2(e). Here, the department's notice conspicuously stated that the mailing date was July 20, 2005, and, in all capital letters, set out...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re Murack
...to dismiss an appeal as untimely raises a jurisdictional question of law, which we review de novo. Kennedy v. Am. Paper Recycling Corp. , 714 N.W.2d 738, 739 (Minn. App. 2006).In analyzing this issue, we first provide an overview of the administrative appeal process and law related to the a......
-
Haugtvedt v. FJF Enter. of Ramsey, Inc.
...disagree. An agency decision to dismiss an appeal as untimely is a question of law that we review de novo. Kennedy v. Am. Paper Recycling Corp., 714 N.W.2d 738, 739 (Minn. App. 2006). The statutory time limit for appealing unemployment-insurance decisions is absolute and precludes jurisdict......
-
Vang v. Work Connection, Inc., No. A06-990 (Minn. App. 4/10/2007)
...2005). An agency's decision to dismiss an appeal as untimely is a question of law that we review de novo. Kennedy v. Am. Paper Recycling Corp., 714 N.W.2d 738, 739 (Minn. App. 2006) (citing Harms v. Oak Meadows, 619 N.W.2d 201, 202 (Minn. 2000) and Stottler v. Meyers Printing Co., 602 N.W.2......
-
Emerson v. Solid-Employees, LLC
...subd. 2(f) (2008). An untimely appeal from a determination must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Kennedy v. Am. Paper Recycling Corp., 714 N.W.2d 738, 740 (Minn. App. 2006). The statutory time period for appeal is "absolute and unambiguous," Semanko v. Dep't of Emp't Servs., 309 Minn.......