Thursday, May 03, 2018

UC - mailbox rule - evidence of mailing

Northeastern Eye Institute v.UCBR – Cmwlth. Court – December 27, 2017

UCBR decision vacated and case remanded for hearing on the mailbox rule, pursuant to Douglas v. UCBR, 151 A.3d 1188, 1192 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2016), where the court held that, in order for the mailbox rule to apply, “there must be some evidence … that the [N]otice was mailed. … Until there is proof that a letter was mailed, there can be no presumption that it was received.” Id. at 1192.   The implications of dismissal or negative action against a party in the face of claims that something which has bearing on critical filing times was “presumptively” received is too potent to not require underlying proof to support the presumption.   Here, there is no evidence of record or testimony demonstrating the notice of hearing was signed in the regular course of business and placed in the regular place of mail.