Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Sherri Mills v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (School District of Harrisburg

August 15, 2011

SHERRI MILLS, PETITIONER
v.
WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEAL BOARD (SCHOOL DISTRICT OF HARRISBURG), RESPONDENT



Per curiam.

ORDER

AND NOW, this 15th day of August, 2011, it is ordered that the above-captioned opinion filed on June 15, 2011, shall be designated OPINION, rather than MEMORANDUM OPINION, and it shall be reported.

IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Sherri Mills, : Petitioner : : v. : Workers' Compensation Appeal Board : (School District of Harrisburg), Respondent :

No. 1958 C.D. 2010

Submitted: April 8, 2011

BEFORE: HONORABLE DAN PELLEGRINI, Judge HONORABLE ROBERT SIMPSON, Judge HONORABLE JOHNNY J. BUTLER, Judge

OPINION

BY JUDGE SIMPSON

FILED: June 15, 2011

Sherri Mills (Claimant) asks this Court to reverse and remand the order of the Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Board) quashing her appeal from a workers' compensation judge's (WCJ) decision. The Board received Claimant's appeal five days after the filing deadline. Because Claimant offers no good cause for her untimely appeal, we affirm.

A WCJ denied Claimant's review, penalty and reinstatement petitions on November 5, 2009. Claimant mailed her appeal to the Board in an envelope bearing a private postmark showing the date November 25, 2009, the day before Thanksgiving. The Board received the envelope the following Monday, November 30, 2009. Employer filed a motion to quash Claimant's appeal as untimely under Section 423 of the Pennsylvania Workers' Compensation Act (Act) *fn1 , 77 P.S. §853.

In her answer to the motion to quash (answer), Claimant averred she obtained a United States Postal Service Form 3817 Certificate of Mailing (Form 3817) showing a postmark of November 25, 2009. She attached a copy of the Form 3817 to her answer.

The Board heard argument and subsequently quashed Claimant's appeal as untimely. The Board noted the postage amount on the Form 3817 differed from the postage amount on the envelope it received. Additionally, the Board reasoned, "There is nothing on the copy of the [Form 3817] to indicate that the certificate applies to the present appeal and not another matter. Under the facts, ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.