Revels v. SCDEW ( 2015 )

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE
CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING
EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.
THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals
Timothy D. Revels, Appellant,
v.
South Carolina Department of Employment and
Workforce and Sherman College of Chiropractic,
Respondents.
Appellate Case No. 2013-002744
Appeal From The Administrative Law Court
Deborah Brooks Durden, Administrative Law Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2015-UP-011
Submitted October 1, 2014 – Filed January 14, 2015
AFFIRMED
Scott Franklin Talley, of Talley Law Firm, P.A., of
Spartanburg, for Appellant.
Michael Brian Magargle, of Constangy Brooks & Smith,
LLP, of Columbia, for Respondent Sherman College of
Chiropractic; and Maura Dawson Baker, of the South
Carolina Department of Employment and Workforce, of
Columbia, for Respondent South Carolina Department of
Employment and Workforce.
PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following
authorities: S.C. Code Ann. § 41-35-750 (Supp. 2013) ("Within thirty days from
the date of mailing the [South Carolina Department of Employment and
Workforce's (SCDEW's)] decision, a party to the proceeding whose benefit rights
or whose employer account may be affected by the [SCDEW's] decision may
initiate an action in the administrative law court against the [SCDEW] for the
review of its decision, in which action every other party to the proceeding before
the [SCDEW] must be made a defendant."); Rule 33, SCALCR ("The notice of
appeal from the final decision of an agency shall be filed with the Court and a copy
served on each party and the agency whose final decision is the subject of the
appeal within thirty (30) days of receipt of the decision from which the appeal is
taken. In appeals from decisions of the [SCDEW], the notice of appeal must be
filed and served within thirty (30) days of the date of the decision of the [SCDEW]
Appellate Panel."); Elam v. S.C. Dep't of Transp., 361 S.C. 9, 14-15, 602 S.E.2d
772, 775 (2004) ("The requirement of service of the notice of appeal is
jurisdictional, i.e., if a party misses the deadline, the appellate court lacks
jurisdiction to consider the appeal and has no authority or discretion to 'rescue' the
delinquent party by extending or ignoring the deadline for service of the notice.");
Allison v. W.L. Gore & Assocs., 394 S.C. 185, 189, 714 S.E.2d 547, 550 (2011)
(stating "an appellate body may not extend the time to appeal").
AFFIRMED.1
FEW, C.J., and THOMAS and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.
1
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.