This opinion will be unpublished and
may not be cited except as provided by
Minn. Stat. § 480A.08, subd. 3 (2006).
IN COURT OF APPEALS
Glen H. Schwartz,
Department of Employment and Economic Development,
Department of Employment and Economic Development
File No. 17101 05
Glen H. Schwartz,
Linda A. Holmes, Lee B. Nelson, Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development, 332 Minnesota Street, 1st National Bank Building, Suite E200, St. Paul, MN 55101-1351 (for respondent)
Considered and decided by Randall, Presiding Judge; Halbrooks, Judge; and Stoneburner, Judge.
Relator’s challenge to the determination that he was overpaid unemployment benefits after he reached a settlement on his workers’ compensation claim was dismissed as untimely. In this certiorari appeal, relator addresses only the merits of, rather than the procedural bar to, his claim. Because the unemployment law judge (ULJ) properly dismissed relator’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction under Minn. Stat. § 268.18, subd. 1(b) (Supp. 2005), we affirm.
On October 5, 2005, the Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) mailed a determination of overpayment to relator Glen H. Schwartz, seeking to recover $6,516.00 of benefits overpaid to him as a result of a settlement relator received for a workers’ compensation claim. Relator did not file his appeal until November 23, 2005, 19 days after the statutory deadline. Realtor acknowledges that he filed his appeal after the 30-day deadline. The ULJ dismissed relator’s appeal as untimely. Relator filed a request for reconsideration, and the ULJ affirmed the order of dismissal. Relator brings a certiorari appeal from the order of dismissal.
The decision of the ULJ to dismiss an appeal as untimely is a
question of law, which this court reviews de novo. Stottler
v. Meyers Printing Co., 602 N.W.2d 916, 918 (
In this appeal, relator does not address the procedural bar to his challenge to DEED’s determination that he was overpaid. Relator does not deny that his appeal was filed after the 30-day deadline. In a letter to the ULJ, relator stated: “I’m sorry for being late with the appeal but I didn’t see the 30 day appeal notice, and I was driving truck and was gone everyday.” Because relator did not file within the statutory deadline, the ULJ correctly dismissed relator’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction.