Previous Page Table Of Contents Next Page

Lewis v Oakwood Health Care Corp. 16.68

Section 38

APPEALS, Timeliness of appeal, Res judicata

CITE AS: Lewis v Oakwood Health Care Corp, Wayne Circuit Court, No. 02-243366-AE (April 29, 2003)

Appeal pending: No

Claimant: Donna M. Lewis
Employer: Oakwood Health Care Corp
Docket No. B2002-10089-RO1-165903W

CIRCUIT COURT HOLDING: An appeal to circuit court must be filed within 30 days of the mailing date of the Board’s decision or order. Attempts to re-litigate an issue from an earlier appeal are barred under the doctrine of res judicata.

FACTS: Claimant appealed a November 15, 2002 Board decision to circuit court. The Board decision held claimant owed restitution under Section 62(a) of the MES Act. The claimant previously appealed the Board’s June 2, 2000 decision holding her disqualified under Section 29(1)(a) to circuit court, and the court affirmed the Board in an order issued March 2, 2001. The claimant did not file a further appeal from that 29(1)(a) decision.

DECISION: The Board’s November 15, 2002 decision is affirmed.

RATIONALE: The claimant’s circuit court brief attempted to re-litigate the issue of her disqualification under 29(1)(a) and did not address the issue of restitution. The court lacked jurisdiction over the 29(1)(a) issue since the claimant had not filed her appeal within 30 days of the mailing date of the decision on that issue pursuant to Section 38(1). The court further noted that claimant’s appeal was barred by the doctrine of res judicata since the issues were identical to her appeal to that court in 2000 and ruled on by the court in an order issued March 2, 2001. Res judicata applies where 1) the former suit was decided on the merits, 2) the issues in the second action were or could have been resolved in the former one, and 3) both actions involve the same parties. In Michigan res judicata is applied broadly. See Energy Reserves v Consumers Power Co, 221 Mich App 210, (1997); Pierson Sand and Gravel, Inc v Keeler Brass Co, 460 Mich 372 (1999); Sewell v Clean Cut Mgmt, Inc, 463 Mich 569 (2001); Dart v Dart, 460 Mich 573 (1999).


Previous Page Table Of Contents Next Page