From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ranieri v. Clausen

Superior Court of Delaware, New Castle County
Sep 24, 2002
C.A. No. 02A-02-011 CG (Del. Super. Ct. Sep. 24, 2002)

Opinion

C.A. No. 02A-02-011 CG

Date Submitted: May 8, 2002

Date Decided: September 24, 2002

On Appellee's Motion to Dismiss

Appeal from the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board. Granted.

Daniel M. Ranieri, Thornton, Pennsylvania, pro se, Appellant.

Stephani Ballard, Deputy Attorney General, Wilmington, Delaware, Attorney for Appellee, Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board.

Melvin A. Woloshin, Esq., Woloshin, Tenenbaum, Lynch, Natalie Gagne, P.A., Wilmington, Delaware, Attorney for Appellees, Henry Clausen and Arlene C. Eskin.


ORDER


This 24th day of September, 2002, upon consideration of the record in this case and the papers filed by the parties, it appears to the Court that:

(1) On, July 3, 2001, the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board issued a written decision denying Claimant, Daniel M. Ranieri, unemployment compensation benefits. The Board mailed the decision to Ranieri on the same date. The Board's decision contained a notice of Ranieri's right to appeal as well as notification that the Board's decision became final on July 13, 2001.

(2) Ranieri filed a Notice of Appeal of the Board's decision with the Court on February 19, 2002. In his Notice of Appeal, Ranieri states that he has been incarcerated in Pennsylvania since June 1, 2001. Appellee, the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, has filed a Motion to Dismiss Ranieri's appeal on the basis that this Court is without jurisdiction to consider Ranieri's untimely appeal.

(3) Nineteen Del. C. § 3323(a) provides that, "[w]ithin 10 days after the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board has become final, any party aggrieved thereby may secure judicial review thereof by commencing an action in the Superior Court in the County in which the claimant resides. . . ." Under the language of the statute, Ranieri's appeal, filed over six months late, is clearly untimely.

(4) It is well-settled that failure to file a timely appeal divests the Court of jurisdiction. The jurisdictional defect that is created cannot be excused except in the presence of "exceptional circumstances that are attributable to court personnel and are not attributable to the appellant or the appellant's attorney."

Draper King Cole v. Malave, 743 A.2d 672, 673 (Del. 1999).

Id.

(5) The Court has determined that the Board`s decision became final on July 13, 2001. Ranieri had until July 27, 2001 to file his appeal with this Court. Ranieri did not file an appeal until February 19, 2002, over six months late. Ranieri's failure to file a timely appeal causes this Court to lose jurisdiction over the matter. Ranieri has presented no evidence that the lateness of his appeal can be attributed to court personnel. In his response to Appellee's motion, Ranieri states again that he has been incarcerated since June 1, 2001 and that he did receive notice "Pepi's filed an appeal." The Court finds that Ranieri has presented no evidence that the appeal he filed with this Court was untimely due to any failure on behalf of Court personnel.

Therefore, for the foregoing reasons, Appellee's Motion to Dismiss Ranieri's appeal is GRANTED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Ranieri v. Clausen

Superior Court of Delaware, New Castle County
Sep 24, 2002
C.A. No. 02A-02-011 CG (Del. Super. Ct. Sep. 24, 2002)
Case details for

Ranieri v. Clausen

Case Details

Full title:DANIEL M. RANIERI, Appellant, v. HENRY CLAUSEN, ARLENE C. ESKIN, PEPI'S…

Court:Superior Court of Delaware, New Castle County

Date published: Sep 24, 2002

Citations

C.A. No. 02A-02-011 CG (Del. Super. Ct. Sep. 24, 2002)

Citing Cases

Alam v. Brandywine Sch. Dist.

Wilson v. Masten Lumber, 1993 WL 590326, at *2 (Del . Super. Dec. 21, 1993) (quoting Fisher v. Boggs, 284…