Opinion ID: 2570325
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: It Was an Abuse of Discretion To Dismiss Carlson's Complaint as Untimely.

Text: The superior court dismissed Carlson's complaint because it was filed more than thirty days after the agency distributed its final decision. [I]f an action in superior court seeks to review a prior administrative decision, it must be treated as an appeal fully subject to the appellate rules. [11] Alaska Appellate Rule 602(a)(2) states that [a]n appeal may be taken to the superior court from an administrative agency within 30 days from the date that the decision appealed from is mailed or otherwise distributed to the appellant. Per that rule, the thirty-day period does not begin to run until the agency has issued a decision that clearly states that it is a final decision and that the claimant has thirty days to appeal. [W]here an administrative agency's decision is communicated in a letter that fails to do either of these things, it is an abuse of discretion not to relax Rule 602(a)(2)'s thirty-day appeal deadline. [12] Following his classification hearing, Carlson appealed his transfer to DOC's deputy commissioner. The deputy commissioner's December 3, 2001 letter rejected Carlson's appeal. The letter did not state that it was a final decision or advise Carlson of his right to appeal within thirty days. Carlson's thirty-day period for filing an administrative appeal has therefore not begun to run. It was consequently an abuse of discretion to dismiss his appeal as untimely.