Opinion
CLAIM NO. E503884
ORDER FILED OCTOBER 5, 1998
Upon review before the FULL COMMISSION in Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas.
Claimant represented by JAMES PETTY, Attorney at Law, Searcy, Arkansas.
Respondents represented by MIKE ROBERTS, Attorney at Law, Little Rock, Arkansas.
ORDER
[2] This case comes on for review before the Commission on respondent's motion to strike claimant's notice of appeal. Since respondent's motion alleges that claimant's notice of appeal was untimely filed, we will treat the motion as one to dismiss claimant's appeal to the Commission 3.After our consideration of respondent's motion, claimant's objection thereto and all other matters properly before the Commission, we find that respondent's motion should be granted.
An Administrative Law Judge filed an opinion on July 17, 1998. A copy of this opinion was sent to the parties by certified mail, return receipt requested. The certified mail receipt indicates that counsel for claimant received a copy of the Administrative Law Judge's opinion on July 18, 1998. Claimant had until August 17, 1998 to file his notice of appeal. However, claimant's notice of appeal was not filed until August 19, 1998.
Pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-711(a)(1) (Repl. 1996), the opinion of the Administrative Law Judge became final unless claimant filed an appeal within 30 days from the receipt of the opinion. The procedural requirements set forth in the statute are mandatory or jurisdictional and must be strictly complied with. Cooper Industrial Products v. Meadows, 5 Ark. App. 205, 634 S.W.2d 400 (1982); Lloyd v. Potlatch Corporation, 19 Ark. App. 335, 721 S.W.2d 670 (1986). Therefore, the opinion of the Administrative Law Judge becomes final and the Full Commission cannot review it if the petition for review is not received within 30 days, as set forth in the statute. Moreover, the rule of unavoidable casualty does not apply to the failure to file a notice of appeal in a timely manner. Williams v. Luft Construction Co., 31 Ark. App. 198, 790 S.W.2d 921 (1990). Since claimant's appeal was not filed within the required 30 days, the appeal was untimely filed and the Commission has no jurisdiction to review it.
In response to respondent's motion, claimant contends that Rule 6(d) of the Arkansas Rules of Civil Procedure allows three additional days to be added to the prescribed period if notice is served by mail. This argument was specifically rejected in Loyce D. Dannehl v. Professional Food Services, Full Commission Opinion filed March 2, 1992 ( E002280), wherein the Commission stated the following:
. . . First, we note that the time provision for filing an appeal is considered jurisdictional and must be strictly complied with. The Arkansas Court of Appeals in Cooper Industrial Products v. Meadow, 5 Ark. App. 205, 634 S.W.2d 400 (1982), held that the Commission does not have the power to waive or extend this statutory period. Further, in Carl Pierce v. ERC Management Group, Full Commission Opinion filed May 19, 1989 ( D709209), this Commission in relying upon the decision in Sagely v. State, 285 Ark. 158, 685 S.W.2d 169 (1985), found that Rule 6(d) was not applicable to judgements. As noted in that case, the time for the filing of a notice of appeal does not begin running until a party receives a copy of the Administrative Law Judge's decision. Thus, a party loses no time for filing a notice of appeal as a result of receiving the Administrative Law Judge's opinion through the mail.
For the foregoing reasons, we find that respondent's motion to dismiss claimant's notice of appeal as untimely filed should be, and hereby is, granted.
IT IS SO ORDERED.