Claimant’s Request for Review Held Insufficiently Specific to Invoke Appeals Panel’s Jurisdiction

The Appeals Panel has dismissed the purported appeal of a claimant on grounds that the “request for review” did not sufficiently point out the error he was complaining of.

In Appeals Panel Decision Number 160575, decided May 31, 2016, the claimant lost his disputed issue at the benefit contested case hearing. After receiving the Hearing Officer’s written Decision and Order, the claimant filed an “information brochure” published by the Division “Appeal Rights and Procedures” with the Appeals Panel. The carrier argued that the filing of the brochure was insufficient to invoke the Appeals Panel’s jurisdiction. The Appeals Panel agreed, writing:

Section 410.202(c) provides, “A request for appeal or a response must clearly and concisely rebut or support the decision of the Hearing Officer on each issue on which review is sought.” See also 28 TEX. ADMIN. CODE § 143.3(a)(2) (Rule 143.3(a)(2)).

* * * * *

The Appeals Panel has held that the filing of that brochure with the Division is insufficient to constitute a request for appeal because it does not tell us how or why a claimant disagrees with a Hearing Officer’s decision. See Appeals Panel Decision (APD) 94973, decided September 1, 1994; and APD 052351, decided November 30, 2005. In APD 94973, the Appeals Panel explained that we have generally held that a simple written statement from an unrepresented claimant that he or she thinks that the hearing officer was wrong and does not agree with the decision will be interpreted as a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, but that even those minimal filings we have accepted as appeals indicated disagreement with the hearing officer’s decision. As was the case in APD 94973, the claimant’s filing of the brochure in the instant case did not state the grounds upon which review was requested nor indicate disagreement with any portion of the hearing officer’s decision. See also APD 000452, decided April 13, 2000; APD 002385, decided December 1, 2000; and APD 030296, decided March 18, 2003; all of which held that the filing of the brochure was insufficient to constitute an appeal.

Although the claimant’s filing of the brochure was timely as an appeal, it was insufficiently specific to constitute an appeal. The time for filing a specific appeal passed without the claimant filing a proper appeal. Accordingly, the Appeals Panel held that the decision and order of the Hearing Officer had become final.