Texas Supreme Court holds that Widow who Missed Filing Deadline can Still Maintain Her Appeal

The Texas Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the court of appeals in Texas Mutual v. Chicas on April 5, 2019, holding that the 45-day deadline for filing suit for judicial review is mandatory but not jurisdictional. The specific issue considered by the court was whether a statutory deadline for judicial review from an administrative denial for workers-compensation death benefits is jurisdictional. In this case Chicas, whose husband died while cleaning gutters at his employer’s president’s home, filed for judicial review in probate court of an administrative-law decision denying her death benefits.

Chicas’ request
for judicial review was filed with a court within the 45-day statutory
deadline. She had a wrongful-death lawsuit pending in probate court. When the
probate court rejected her judicial review, granting the carrier’s
jurisdictional plea, Chicas immediately filed in state district court, by then
well beyond 45 days from when the administrative-law judge mailed the decision
in Chicas’ death-benefits challenge. The carrier again moved to dismiss on a
jurisdictional plea. Chicas, contending the statutory deadline for review in a
district court is not jurisdictional, argued the deadline should be tolled
while the probate court decided the death-benefits denial. The trial court
dismissed her review, but the appeals court reversed, holding the statutory
deadline for judicial review of a workers-comp matter is not jurisdictional.

The Supreme Court
held that the 45-day deadline is mandatory but not
jurisdictional. The court
of appeals properly determined no explicit statutory language indicates the Legislature
intended the 45-day deadline to be jurisdictional. It does not refer to the
trial court’s jurisdiction in any way. The lack of a savings clause in Labor
Code section 410.252(a) raises a question whether the statute contains specific
consequences for noncompliance. When a statute does not require dismissal for
failure to comply, this weighs in favor that it is not jurisdictional. Although
the Legislature did establish a 45-day deadline to seek judicial review,
nothing in the act indicates that deadline is jurisdictional. The court wrote

We conclude that the 45-day deadline to seek review from an appeals-panel decision in section 410.252(a) is not jurisdictional. Multiple courts of appeals have held otherwise. See Davis v. Am. Cas. Co., 408 S.W.3d 1, 6 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2012, pet. denied); Fire & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Miranda, 293 S.W.3d 620, 624–25 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2009, no pet.); Tex. Mun. League Intergovernmental Risk Pool v. Burns, 209 S.W.3d 806, 812 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2006, no pet.); LeBlanc v. Everest Nat’l Ins. Co., 98 S.W.3d 786, 787 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi–Edinburg 2003, no pet.); Johnson v. United Parcel Serv., 36 S.W.3d 918, 921 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2001, pet. denied); Argonaut Sw. Ins. v. Walker, 64 S.W.3d 654, 657 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2001, pet. denied); DeVore v. Am. Mfr.’s Mut. Ins. Co., No. 01-07-00495-CV, 2008 WL 2611886, at *2–3 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] June 27, 2008, no pet.) (mem. op.). To the extent these cases conflict with our holding in this case, we overrule them.

B

Next, Texas Mutual asserts that the court of appeals incorrectly held that the filing deadline in section 410.252(a) “is a statute of limitations” and signaled that the tolling provision of Civil Practice and Remedies Code section 16.064 would apply. 522 S.W.3d at 74 & 75 n.4. Texas 13 Mutual urges this Court to reverse the court of appeals’ statute-of-limitations holding and hold that the Workers’ Compensation Act precludes application of procedures outside the Act, such as those in the Civil Practice and Remedies Code. However, as noted by the court of appeals, Texas Mutual’s plea to the jurisdiction relied entirely on its argument that the 45-day deadline at issue is jurisdictional. Id. at 74. Having decided that issue, we do not decide any others and leave them instead for resolution in the court below. See City of DeSoto, 288 S.W.3d at 393 (noting that consequences may flow from a party’s failure to comply with a non-jurisdictional requirement).

***

The 45-day deadline to file suit for judicial review of an appeals-panel decision in section 410.252(a) of the Labor Code is not jurisdictional. Accordingly, the trial court erred in granting Texas Mutual’s plea to the jurisdiction based on Chicas’s failure to file suit in district court by the deadline. We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals and remand the case to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

The arguments conducted in the case on January 22, 2019, can be seen here. The briefs of the parties can be read here.