Alabama Department of Labor v. Rickell Grayson

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

REL: 09/13/2013 Notice: T h i s o p i n i o n i s s u b j e c t t o formal r e v i s i o n b e f o r e p u b l i c a t i o n i n t h e advance s h e e t s o f Southern R e p o r t e r . R e a d e r s a r e r e q u e s t e d t o n o t i f y t h e R e p o r t e r o f D e c i s i o n s , Alabama A p p e l l a t e C o u r t s , 300 D e x t e r A v e n u e , M o n t g o m e r y , A l a b a m a 3 6 1 0 4 - 3 7 4 1 ((334) 2 2 9 - 0 6 4 9 ) , o f a n y t y p o g r a p h i c a l o r o t h e r e r r o r s , i n o r d e r t h a t c o r r e c t i o n s may b e made b e f o r e t h e o p i n i o n i s p r i n t e d i n Southern R e p o r t e r . ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS SPECIAL TERM, 2013 2120291 Alabama Department o f Labor v. Rickell Grayson Appeal from J e f f e r s o n C i r c u i t (CV-12-1201) Court MOORE, J u d g e . The formerly Alabama known Department as o f Labor t h e Alabama ("the d e p a r t m e n t " ) , Department of Industrial 2120291 Relations, Court its 1 ("the appeals from a judgment of the circuit consideration benefits f i l e d The that benefits agency. with the remanding to the claim for submitted filed claim for We the reverse. circuit court indicates for unemployment-compensation unemployment-compensation T h a t c l a i m was d e n i e d , and r e f l e c t i n g t h a t d e n i a l was Grayson purported department department's the a to Circuit unemployment-compensation by R i c k e l l G r a y s o n . evidence Grayson court") Jefferson to mailed appeal a n o t i c e of determination t o G r a y s o n on June 25, the denial to the h e a r i n g s and a p p e a l s d i v i s i o n o f t h e d e p a r t m e n t by m a i l i n g her n o t i c e o f a p p e a l ; t h a t n o t i c e was and appeals d i v i s i o n of the of her claim 2012. n o t r e c e i v e d by t h e department u n t i l hearings J u l y 12, 2012. The h e a r i n g s and a p p e a l s d i v i s i o n d e t e r m i n e d t h a t , b e c a u s e t h e notice of appeal was n o t i c e of d e t e r m i n a t i o n been untimely filed received was and, more mailed thus, than 15 days after to Grayson, the a p p e a l the determination the had denying See § 2 5 - 2 - 1 . 1 ( a ) , A l a . Code 1975 ( " A l l powers, d u t i e s , and f u n c t i o n s and a l l r e l a t e d r e c o r d s , p r o p e r t y , e q u i p m e n t o f , e m p l o y e e s o f , and a l l c o n t r a c t u a l r i g h t s , o b l i g a t i o n s o f , and unexpended b a l a n c e s of a p p r o p r i a t i o n s and o t h e r f u n d s o r a l l o c a t i o n s o f t h e D e p a r t m e n t o f L a b o r s h a l l be t r a n s f e r r e d t o t h e D e p a r t m e n t o f I n d u s t r i a l R e l a t i o n s w h i c h s h a l l be renamed t h e D e p a r t m e n t o f L a b o r on O c t o b e r 1, 2 0 1 2 . " ) . 1 2 2120291 Grayson's c l a i m was final. Grayson filed an a p p l i c a t i o n to appeal to the department's board of appeals, which d i s a l l o w e d the appeal. Thereafter, Grayson appealed to the circuit court to dismiss court. The department Grayson's moved appeal; that the motion circuit was denied. Thereafter, on November 30, 2012, t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t e n t e r e d an o r d e r s t a t i n g , in pertinent part: "In t h i s case, the undisputed evidence i s that the p l a i n t i f f , R i c k e l l Grayson, m a i l e d her n o t i c e of a p p e a l [ t o t h e h e a r i n g s and a p p e a l s d i v i s i o n o f t h e department] from the denial of unemployment c o m p e n s a t i o n b e n e f i t s t h e day b e f o r e t h e filing d e a d l i n e . She was a s s u r e d by t h e p o s t o f f i c e t h a t she w o u l d have n e x t day d e l i v e r y . The d e f e n d a n t , The Alabama Department of I n d u s t r i a l R e l a t i o n s (now known as t h e A l a b a m a D e p a r t m e n t o f L a b o r ) moved t o d i s m i s s t h e a p p e a l , c l a i m i n g t h a t i t was f i l e d ... late. "Under t h e s e f a c t s , t h e C o u r t f o u n d t h a t i t would v i o l a t e the fundamental b e n e f i c e n t purpose of t h e A c t as w e l l as b a s i c p r i n c i p l e s o f e q u i t y and f a i r n e s s t o d e n y t h e p l a i n t i f f a h e a r i n g on t h e m e r i t s . As a r e s u l t , t h e C o u r t d e n i e d t h e M o t i o n t o D i s m i s s and s e t t h e c a s e f o r t r i a l . " On judgment December 19, 2012, the circuit court entered stating: " T h i s unemployment c o m p e n s a t i o n a p p e a l i s h e r e b y remanded to the Alabama Department of Labor, formerly known as the Alabama Department of 3 a 2120291 Industrial Relations, for their administrative consideration of the plaintiff's claim for unemployment c o m p e n s a t i o n b e n e f i t s . "This i s a f i n a l remitted." are The department J a n u a r y 29, On in i t s notice of case. appeal to Costs this court on 2013. appeal, erred filed judgment i n t h i s the denying department argues t h a t the i t s motion to dismiss circuit and in court remanding Grayson's c l a i m f o r unemployment-compensation b e n e f i t s to the department because, i t says, the hearing and filed. We appeals d i v i s i o n of the appeal to d e p a r t m e n t was untimely agree. Section pertinent Grayson's i n i t i a l 25-4-91(d)(1), Ala. Code 1975, provides, in part: " U n l e s s any p a r t y t o whom n o t i c e o f d e t e r m i n a t i o n i s r e q u i r e d t o be g i v e n s h a l l , w i t h i n s e v e n calendar d a y s a f t e r d e l i v e r y o f s u c h n o t i c e o r w i t h i n 15 c a l e n d a r d a y s a f t e r s u c h n o t i c e was m a i l e d t o h i s last known a d d r e s s , file an appeal from such d e c i s i o n , s u c h d e c i s i o n s h a l l be deemed f i n a l . " In Olsen (Ala. v. Moffat C i v . App. Road V e t e r i n a r y 1983), t h i s notice of appeal w i t h i n appeal following the Clinic, 441 So. 2d c o u r t h e l d t h a t the m a i l i n g of the denial statutory period of 4 a claim for for taking 971 a an unemployment- 2120291 compensation benefits d i d not s a t i s f y the requirement f o r f i l i n g the n o t i c e of appeal; i n s t e a d , t h i s court h e l d that the n o t i c e o f a p p e a l must a c t u a l l y be r e c e i v e d b y t h e within the p e r i o d Department (Ala. allowed. of I n d u s t r i a l C i v . App. 1 9 9 4 ) , Further, Relations, this court department i n Burgess 637 So. 2d v. State 1366, 1368 explained: " I t i s w e l l s e t t l e d t h a t an a p p e a l i s n o t a matter of vested r i g h t b u t i s by the grace o f s t a t u t e and must be p e r f e c t e d p u r s u a n t t o t h e t i m e and manner p r e s c r i b e d i n t h e c o n t r o l l i n g s t a t u t e . M o u t r y v. S t a t e , 359 So. 2d 388 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1978). The appeal must be dismissed i f the r e q u i r e m e n t s o f t h e c o n t r o l l i n g s t a t u t e a r e n o t met. M o u t r y , 359 So. 2d 388. II "This court has p r e v i o u s l y held that the c o n t r o l l i n g s t a t u t e s i n unemployment compensation cases r e q u i r e the t i m e l y f i l i n g of a n o t i c e of appeal. Davis v. A l a b a m a Dep't of Industrial R e l a t i o n s , 641 So. 2d 810 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1 9 9 4 ) ; H a i g l e r v. Dep't o f I n d u s t r i a l R e l a t i o n s , 512 So. 2d 113 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1987) . A document has n o t b e e n f i l e d u n t i l i t has a c t u a l l y b e e n r e c e i v e d ; mere m a i l i n g i s n o t enough. M o u t r y , 359 So. 2d 388. " T h i s c o u r t r e c o g n i z e d t h a t t h i s m i g h t seem t o be a h a r s h r e s u l t and s t a t e d t h e f o l l o w i n g i n H a i g l e r , 512 So. 2d a t 115: "'Though t h e r e s u l t may seem somewhat h a r s h and unemployment c o m p e n s a t i o n l a w i s t o be c o n s t r u e d l i b e r a l l y , t h e c o u r t s a r e not a u t h o r i z e d t o extend a time p e r i o d t h a t 5 2120291 i s s t a t u t o r i l y m a n d a t e d where t h e p r o c e d u r e is exclusive.'" In the present case, Grayson's initial appeal to the h e a r i n g a n d a p p e a l s d i v i s i o n o f t h e d e p a r t m e n t was r e c e i v e d on J u l y 12, 2012, 17 d a y s a f t e r t h e n o t i c e o f d e t e r m i n a t i o n was mailed outside The t o Grayson on June 25, 2012, a n d , t h u s , the statutory period set forth was filed i n § 25-4-91(d) ( 1 ) . c i r c u i t court t h e r e f o r e e r r e d i n denying the department's m o t i o n t o d i s m i s s and i n remanding t h e case t o t h e department. Accordingly, remand t h i s we reverse the c i r c u i t cause w i t h i n s t r u c t i o n s d i s m i s s Grayson's court's judgment and f o rthe c i r c u i t court to appeal. REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS. Thompson, P . J . , and P i t t m a n , concur. 6 Thomas, a n d D o n a l d s o n , J J . ,

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.