Darren Collins, Jr., Claimant/Appellant v. Dillard's Inc. and Division of Employment Security

ANGELA T. QUIGLESS, Chief Judge. Claimant, Darren Collins, Jr. (Claimant), has filed a notice of appeal from the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission’s (Commission) decision concerning his claim for unemployment benefits. We dismiss the appeal. A deputy of the Division of Employment Security (Division) concluded that Claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment benefits. Claimant appealed to both the Appeals Tribunal of. the Division and ultimately to the Commission. Both affirmed the disqualification. The Commission mailed its final decision to Claimant on'June 16, 2014. Claimant filed a notice of appeal-to this Court. The Division has filed a motion to dismiss Claimant’s appeal. Claimant has not filed a response to the motion. The Division contends that Claimant’s notice of appeal to this court was not filed within the time limits set forth in chapter 288, RSMo. Section 288.210, RSMo 2000, provides that: “Within twenty days after a decision of the commission has become final, the director or any party aggrieved by such decision may appeal the decision to the appellate court....” The Commission’s decision becomes final ten days after it is mailed to the parties. Section 288.200.2, RSMo 2000. Here, the Secretary to the Commission certified she mailed its decision to Claimant on June 16, 2014. Therefore, Claimant’s notice of appeal to this Court was due on or before July 16, 2014. Sections 288.200.2, 288.210. Claimant faxed his notice of appeal to the Commission, which received it on July 24, 2014/ Therefore, Claimant’s notice, of appeal was untimely. ■ The unemployment statutes do not provide a procedure for filing a late notice of appeal. Ross v. Division of Employment Sec., 332 S.W.3d 922 (Mo.App.E.D.2011). While there are procedures for filing a late notice of appeal in other civil matters, such procedures do not apply to special statutory proceedings, .such as unemployment matters under Chapter 288. Heffner v. Division of Employment Sec., 345 S.W.3d 393, 394 (Mo.App.E.D.2011). Therefore, this court’s only option is to dismiss Claimant’s appeal. The Division’s motion to dismiss is granted. The appeal is dismissed. LISA VAN AMBURG, J. and PHILIP M. HESS, J., concur.