Opinion
No. 65305-9-I.
Filed: December 20, 2010. UNPUBLISHED OPINION
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for King County, No. 08-2-17476-0, Gregory P. Canova, J., entered January 23, 2009.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Booker McClenty appeals the dismissal of his petition for judicial review of administrative decisions denying his application for unemployment benefits. We affirm.
The Department of Employment Security denied Booker McClenty's application for unemployment benefits. An administrative law judge affirmed, as did the commissioner of the Department. McClenty then timely filed a petition for judicial review in King County Superior Court, but he did not timely serve the Department. On the Department's motion, the superior court dismissed the petition for McClenty's noncompliance with statutory service requirements. McClenty then appealed directly to the Washington State Supreme Court, which transferred the case to this court.
Judicial review proceedings under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) are creatures of statute, and all statutory prerequisites must be satisfied to invoke the superior court's statutory appellate authority. City of Seattle v. Pub. Employment Relations Comm'n, 116 Wn.2d 923, 926-27, 809 P.2d 1377 (1991). It is undisputed that McClenty failed to timely serve the Department as required by RCW 34.05.542(2). Accordingly, the superior court properly dismissed his petition for review.
McClenty claims he was prevented from timely serving the Department for various reasons, but the APA contains no "good cause" exception to the service requirement. Clymer v. Employment Security Department, 82 Wn. App. 25, 30, 917 P.2d 1091 (1996). And RCW 50.32.075, cited by McClenty, applies only to administrative appeals and petitions under RCW 50.32, not petitions for judicial review under the APA. Clymer, 82 Wn. App. at 30 n. 2.
Affirmed.