On March 26, 1981, by majority vote, the Workmen's Compensation Commission issued an order stating that the commission had no jurisdiction to review the orders of the administrative judge because neither party filed a timely petition for review pursuant to the requirements of § 71-3-47, supra, (1972). The commission relied upon Day Detectives, Inc. v. Savell, 291 So.2d 716 (Miss. 1974), and Marlboro Shirt Company v. Whittington, 195 So.2d 920 (Miss. 1967) as authority for the proposition that the 20-day filing requirement is jurisdictional in nature.

¶ 20. In addition, we cannot agree with the dissent that the Supreme Court's decision in Day Detectives Inc. v. Savell, 291 So.2d 716, 720–21 (Miss.1974), requires dismissal of this appeal. A fair reading of Savell demonstrates otherwise. In Savell, the claimant filed a “motion to withdraw” (essentially, a motion to reconsider) two days after the AJ's initial ruling, the AJ denied the motion to withdraw several months later, and the claimant then promptly filed a petition for review before the full Commission. Seeid. The issue that the Supreme Court addressed in Savell was whether the claimant's petition for review was barred pursuant to Mississippi Code Annotated section 71–3–47, which provides that a decision issued by an AJ “shall be final unless within twenty (20) days a request or petition for review by the full [C]ommission is filed.

We note that "[i]nformal proceedings are encouraged in workmen's compensation cases and are so designed that the commission can best ascertain the rights of the parties and prevent unnecessary delays, costly appeals, rehearings, etc." Day Detectives, Inc. v. Savell, 291 So.2d 716, 721 (Miss. 1974). Additionally, workers' compensation procedure

Scott Builders, Inc. v. Dependent of Layton, 244 Miss. 641, 145 So.2d 165 (1962). In the case sub judice, as in Day Detectives, Inc. v. Savell, 291 So.2d 716 (Miss. 1974), the administrative law judge led Monroe to believe that there would be further hearings on the claim, and Monroe received no notice to the contrary. This Court in Day Detectives reversed and held as follows:

This Court reversed and gave instructions to the Commission to reopen the case and allow the proof. In Day Detectives, Inc. v. Savell, 291 So.2d 716 (Miss. 1974), the Court considered whether a Workers' Compensation case should be reopened before final judgment was entered. The claimant there failed to present medical evidence to support his claim that a heart attack arose out of and in the course of his employment.

It is well established that, if a petition for review of an ALJ's order is not filed within twenty days, further action is barred. Miss. Code Ann. § 71-3-47 (1972); Day Detectives, Inc., v. Savell, 291 So.2d 716 (Miss. 1974); Marlboro Shirt Co. v. Whittington, 195 So.2d 920 (Miss. 1967).

[MCA § 71-3-47 (1972)]. In the case of Day Detectives, Inc. v. Savell, 291 So.2d 716 (Miss. 1974), the losing party before the administrative judge filed a similar motion as was filed here within the twenty-day statutory period. We held that the filing of that motion tolled the twenty-day statutory appeal time from the administrative judge's order to the full commission.

SeeFord , 909 So. 2d at 1196 (¶ 4) ; see alsoStaples v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Miss. Inc ., 585 So. 2d 747, 748 (Miss. 1991) ; Day Detectives Inc. v. Savell , 291 So. 2d 716, 720 (Miss. 1974). ¶7.

However, "the [t]estimony of . . . doctors [is] vital to [a] claimant's case and the [Commission should not . . ." arbitrarily dismiss[][it] . . . without hear Ling this testimony." Day Detectives, Inc. v. Savell, 291 So.2d 716, 721 (Miss. 1974). Moreover, "[i]Informal proceedings are encouraged in workmen's compensation cases and are so designed that the [C]ommission ! can best ascertain the rights of the parties and prevent unnecessary delays, costly appeals, rehearings, etc."

See Staples v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Miss., Inc., 585 So.2d 747, 748 (Miss. 1991); Day Detectives, Inc. v. Savell, 291 So.2d 716, 720 (Miss. 1974); Marlboro Shirt Co. v. Whittington, 195 So.2d 920, 921 (Miss. 1967).