ORDERS:
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
In the above-captioned matter, Respondent filed a Petition for Administrative Review of
Administrative Order No. 98-0087-UST, in which the Department ordered Respondent to correct
certain statutory and regulatory violations, pay a penalty of $5,575, and pay registration fees of $220
within thirty days of the effective date of the order. The case was scheduled for a contested case
hearing before the Administrative Law Judge Division on June 21, 1999. However, on June 11,
1999, Kelly D.H. Lowry, Counsel for the Department, made a Motion to Dismiss alleging a lack of
subject matter jurisdiction because Respondent's appeal of the Administrative Order was untimely.
Counsel for Respondent did not respond to the Motion to Dismiss.
The Department issued Administrative Order No. 98-0087-UST on December 23, 1998, and
the Greenwood County Sheriff's Office served a copy of the Order on Respondent on January 6,
1999.(1) Counsel for Respondent wrote a letter requesting Administrative Review on January 21,
1999. However, the Clerk of the DHEC Board did not receive the letter until January 22, 1999.
The Department's procedures for contested cases provides that "[a]ny person may request an
adjudicatory hearing by filing a Petition for Administrative Review with the Clerk of the Board. Any
such Petition must be filed within fifteen days or, other period provided by law, following . . . receipt
of an administrative order." 25 S.C. Code Ann. Regs. 61-72.201.A (Supp. 1998). The Department's
procedures are specific with regard to when filing is actually effective. "Filing is effective upon receipt by the Clerk." 25 S.C. Code Ann. Regs. 61-72.301.A (Supp. 1998).
A court has a duty to determine whether it has jurisdiction in a matter. Bridges v. Wyandotte
Worsted Co., 243 S.C. 1. 132 S.E.2d 18 (1963). Further, issues relating to subject matter jurisdiction
may be raised at any time. Johnson v. State, 319 S.C. 62, 459 S.E.2d 840 (1955). The failure to
effect a timely appeal extinguishes the court's subject matter jurisdiction over a case. See Botany
Bay Marina v. Townsend, 296 S.C. 330, 372 S.E.2d 584 (1988) (overruled in part on other grounds); Woodward v. Westvaco Corp., 319 S.C. 240, 460 S.E.2d 392 (1995). Because of Respondent's
failure to timely appeal the Department's Administrative Order, the Petition for Administrative
Review must be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the above-captioned case is HEREBY DISMISSED with prejudice.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
______________________________
JOHN D. GEATHERS
Administrative Law Judge
Post Office Box 11667
Columbia, South Carolina 29211-1667
June 22, 1999
Columbia, South Carolina
1. With its motion, the Department attached an affidavit from the Sheriff's Department
verifying the date of service. |
