Herring Gas Company, Inc. v. Miss. Emp. Sec. Comm'n
| Docket Number: | 2004-CC-01765-COA Linked Case(s): 2004-CC-01765-COA |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Date: 07-18-2006 Opinion Author: Myers, P.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Unemployment benefits - Timeliness of appeal Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Chandler and Ishee, JJ. Dissenting Author : Roberts, J. Dissent Joined By : Lee, P.J. Griffis and Barnes, JJ.; Southwick, J. Joins In Part. Concurs in Result Only: Irving, J. |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 08-19-2004 Appealed from: Jones County Circuit Court Judge: Billy Joe Landrum Case Number: 2003-175-CV9 |
|
| Note: | Motion for Rehearing granted on 12/12/2006. This opinion is withdrawn and replaced with 12/12/2006 opinion. | |
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Herring Gas Company, Inc. |
|||
| Appellee: | Mississippi Employment Security Commission |
|
||
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Unemployment benefits - Timeliness of appeal |
| Summary of the Facts: | Patsy Kouches was employed for approximately eleven months as a secretary for Herring Gas Company, Inc. Kouches was discharged for suspicion of misappropriation of company property. Upon filing for unemployment benefits by Kouches, a claims examiner investigated the facts and circumstances surrounding the dismissal and recommended payment of benefits. The examiner’s notice of chargeability was mailed on May 15, 2003 to Herring. The notice informed Herring that there was a fourteen day deadline (including weekends) from the date of mailing to appeal the decision of the claims examiner. Herring did not file an appeal until June 18, 2003, which was eighteen days after the May 30 deadline. Herring was informed on June 24, 2003, that the request for reconsideration was untimely. A referee found that Herring had not shown good cause for missing the fourteen-day appeal deadline and as such the referee had no jurisdiction and the claim examiner’s decision was final. Herring appealed to the Board of Review which affirmed. Herring appealed to circuit court which affirmed. Herring appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Herring argues that the findings by the Commission were not based on substantial and credible evidence and that the refusal to consider new evidence violates Herring’s right to due process. The notice of chargeability clearly stated the time frame in which an appeal must be filed and the manner in which to file that appeal. The Board’s refusal to consider the new evidence asserted by Herring does not violate Herring’s right of due process due to the untimely filing of its appeal. Herring did not file its notice of appeal within the statutorily specified period of fourteen days and therefore its appeal was not perfected. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
