Pursuant to the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act, TEX. REV. CIV. STAT. ANN. art. 8308-1.01 et seq. (Vernon Supp. 1993) (1989 Act), a contested case hearing was held in (city), Texas, on May 5, 1993, (hearing officer) presiding as hearing officer. He determined that the respondent, claimant herein, was an employee of both (employer) and when he was injured in the course and scope of his employment. The hearing officer also found that appellant, workers’ compensation carrier for Custom Slate, Incorporated, is liable under it’s insurance policy for injuries suffered by the claimant. Slate and Tile, Incorporated, did not carry workers’ compensation insurance. Appellant, carrier herein, appeals the findings of fact and conclusions of law regarding the status of claimant as an employee of Custom Slate, Incorporated. Claimant asserts that the request for review was not timely filed and urges affirmance of the hearing officer’s decision.
DECISION
Finding that the request for review was not timely filed and that the jurisdiction of the Appeals Panel has not been properly invoked, the decision of the hearing officer has become final pursuant to the provisions of Article 8308-6.34 (h) and 6.41(a), and Tex. W. C. Comm’n 28 TEX. ADMIN. CODE. § 143.3(a)(3) (Rule 143.3(a)(3)).
Article 8308-6.41(a) provides that a party desiring to appeal the decision of the hearing officer must do so not later than 15 days after receiving the decision. The
contested case hearing was concluded on May 5, 1993. The hearing officer signed the decision on May 11, 1993. Internal Commission records disclose that the decision was mailed on May 24, 1993.
In its request for review dated June 16, 1993, the carrier did not allege the date it received the hearing officer’s decision or in any way address the timeliness issue. Thus, pursuant to Rule 102.5(h), receipt is presumed to have been on May 29, 1993, five days after mailing. Applying the five day rule to the date of mailing plus the 15 days for filing an appeal, we conclude that the last day to invoke the jurisdiction of the Appeals Panel would have been June 13, 1993. Since this day was a Sunday, the final appeal date is extended to the next day, June 14, 1993. See Rule 102.3(a)(3). The request for review is dated and post marked June 16, 1993, and is therefore, untimely.
The request for review having been determined to be untimely, the jurisdiction of the Appeals Panel has not been properly invoked. Accordingly, the decision of the hearing officer has become final.
Stark O. Sanders, Jr. – Chief Appeals Judge
CONCUR:
Robert W. Potts – Appeals Judge
Lynda H. Nesenholtz – Appeals Judge