Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
2009-UP-522 - Timothy Davis v. SC Department of Corrections

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE.  IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals

Timothy Davis, Appellant,

v.

South Carolina Department of Corrections, Respondent.


Appeal From Richland County
Carolyn C. Matthews, ALC Court Judge


Unpublished Opinion No.  2009-UP-522
Submitted November 2, 2009 – Filed November 19, 2009


AFFIRMED


Timothy Davis, pro se, for Appellant.

Robert W. Jacobs, of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Timothy Davis appeals the Administrative Law Court's (ALC) dismissal of his appeal due to his failure to timely serve South Carolina Department of Corrections with the notice of appeal.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities:  Rule 68, SCALCR (providing that the South Carolina Appellate Court Rules and the South Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure be applied "in proceedings before the [ALC] to resolve questions not addressed by these rules"); Rule 234(b), SCACR (finding the time for serving the notice of appeal may not be "extended or shortened."); Rule 59, SCALCR ("The notice of appeal from the final decision to be heard by the [ALC] shall be filed with the Court and a copy served on each party, including the agency, within thirty (30) days of receipt of the decision from which the appeal is taken."); Rule 62, SCALCR (providing for dismissal of an appeal from the ALC for failure to follow procedural rules); Mears v. Mears, 287 S.C. 168, 169, 337 S.E.2d 206, 207 (1985) ("Service of the notice of intent to appeal is a jurisdictional requirement," and courts are unable to extend or expand the time in which the notice of appeal must be served.).

AFFIRMED. 

SHORT, THOMAS, and KONDUROS, JJ., concur.


[1] We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.