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.
