Joe Anthony Romero v. Texas Workers' Compensation Commission; Onsite Commercial Staffing Company; and International Trading Company, Inc. and Tyson Foods Inc.--Appeal from 157th District Court of Harris County

Annotate this Case
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-02-00512-CV
Joe Anthony ROMERO,
Appellant
v.
TEXAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION,
Onsite Commercial Staffing, and International Trading Company, Inc.,
Appellees
From the 157th Judicial District Court, Harris County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2002-07391
Honorable George Hanks, Judge Presiding

Opinion by: Alma L. L pez, Chief Justice

Sitting: Alma L. L pez, Chief Justice

Karen Angelini, Justice

Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice

Delivered and Filed: June 4, 2003

AFFIRMED

Joe Anthony Romero appeals the trial court's order dismissing his lawsuit for lack of jurisdiction. Section 410.252 of the Texas Labor Code provides that a party may seek judicial review of an appeals panel's decision by filing suit not later than the 40th day after the date on which the decision of the appeals panel was filed with the division. Tex. Lab. Code Ann. 410.252 (Vernon 1996). In this case, the appeals panel's decision was filed with the division on January 2, 2002. As a result, Romero was required to file his lawsuit not later than Monday, February 11, 2002. Romero filed his lawsuit on February 12, 2002. Accordingly, the lawsuit was untimely filed, and the trial court properly dismissed the lawsuit for lack of jurisdiction. (1) See LeBlanc v. Everest Nat'l Ins. Co., 98 S.W.3d 786, 789 (Tex. App.--Corpus Christi 2003, no pet.); Boone v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 968 S.W.2d 468, 470 (Tex. App.--Fort Worth 1998, pet. denied); Morales v. Employers Cas. Co., 897 S.W.2d 866, 868 (Tex. App.--San Antonio 1995, writ denied). The trial court's order is affirmed.

Alma L. L pez, Chief Justice

1. We note that the decision of the hearing officer was likely final because Romero failed to timely appeal to the appeals panel. Tex. Lab. Code Ann. 410.169 (Vernon 1996).

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.