Blue Point v. Labor Comm'n

Blue Point v. Labor Comm'n

IN THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS

----ooOoo----

Blue Point LLC and Ryan VanBrocklin,

Petitioners,

v.

Labor Commission and Sadie Clifford,

Respondents.

MEMORANDUM DECISION
(Not For Official Publication)
 

Case No. 20040444-CA
 

F I L E D
(September 2, 2004)
 

2004 UT App 296

 

-----

Original Proceeding in this Court

Attorneys: Ryan VanBrocklin, Clearfield, Petitioner Pro Se

Alan Hennebold, Salt Lake City, for Respondents

-----

Before Judges Bench, Davis, and Jackson.

PER CURIAM:

    Petitioners Blue Point LLC and Ryan VanBrocklin filed a petition for review of final agency action following informal adjudicative proceedings in the Utah Labor Commission (Commission). The Commission seeks dismissal because judicial review of informal agency proceedings must be sought in the district court. No opposition has been filed.

    The Commission correctly states that an agency may designate categories of adjudicative proceedings to be conducted informally. See Utah Code Ann. § 63-46b-4(1) (Supp. 2003). The Commission designated wage claims as a category that may be resolved by informal proceedings. See Utah Admin. Code R610-3-9(a). Accordingly, subject matter jurisdiction over judicial review of the agency action following informal adjudicative proceedings lies in the district court. See Utah Code Ann. § 63-46b-15(1)(a) (Supp. 2003) (stating district courts have jurisdiction to review by trial de novo all final agency actions resulting from informal adjudicative proceedings, except matters reserved to the juvenile court). We lack subject matter jurisdiction to consider the petition for review.

    Although rule 44 of the Utah Rules of Appellate Procedure permits transfer of a timely petition for review filed in the incorrect court, we note that no party has moved for transfer and the Commission's motion for summary dismissal is not opposed.(1) Under the circumstances, we do not transfer the case on our own motion. VanBrocklin failed to file a response to the Commission's motion on his own behalf, and Blue Point LLC did not retain counsel to appear and respond. In sum, petitioners neither oppose dismissal nor request transfer of this case to district court.

    Accordingly, we dismiss the petition for review based upon lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

______________________________

Russell W. Bench,

Associate Presiding Judge

______________________________

James Z. Davis, Judge

______________________________

Norman H. Jackson, Judge

1. This court notified Ryan VanBrocklin in a letter dated July 1, 2004 that unless he is a licensed Utah attorney, he cannot represent the interests of the corporate entity Blue Point LLC, although he may represent his own individual interests. No licensed attorney appeared on behalf of Blue Point LLC within the time allowed by this court.