Summary
The District of Columbia Court of Appeals reviewed the dismissal of an application for review of a disability compensation order as untimely. The court held that the applicants reasonably relied on an administrative law judge's Errata Order stating that the thirty-day appeal period ran from the filing of the errata, and therefore reversed and remanded for consideration on the merits.
Holdings
- The application for review was timely because petitioners reasonably relied on the Errata Order's express statement that the application could be filed within thirty days of the errata.
- The director's dismissal was reversed, and the matter was remanded for disposition of petitioners' application for review on the merits.
Questions Presented
- Whether the DOES director erred in dismissing petitioners' application for review as untimely when petitioners relied on an administrative law judge's subsequent Errata Order expressly setting a later filing deadline.
- Whether an agency's clear subsequent notice concerning the appeal deadline prevents the agency from applying the earlier deadline to foreclose administrative review.
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded
Cases Cited (3)
- Ploufe v. District of Columbia Department of Employment Services, 497 A.2d 464 (D.C. 1985)(followed)
- Thomas v. District of Columbia Department of Employment Services, 490 A.2d 1162 (D.C. 1985)(followed)
- Cobo v. District of Columbia Department of Employment Services, 501 A.2d 1278 (D.C. 1985)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…