No Need to Mail Process to the Government on a Saturday, Even if the Post Office Is Open

18 December 2014 Wisconsin Appellate Law Blog

In Wisconsin, a party seeking judicial review of an administrative decision must, within 30 days of service of the agency decision, file a petition for review in the trial court and serve the agency with a copy of the petition. If the 30th day falls on a Saturday and the agency is closed on Saturday, the party can wait until Monday to personally serve the agency. But what if the party is serving the agency by mail? Can it wait until Monday to mail the petition even though the post office is open on Saturday? Yes, it can, according to a recent published decision by District 4 of Wisconsin’s court of appeals. Madison Metro. Sch. Dist. v. Evers, 2014 WI App 109. 

On August 15, 2013, Wisconsin’s Department of Public Instruction (DPI) denied four applications for open enrollment for students at the Madison Metropolitan School District and served a copy of the decision on the district. Thirty days later, September 14, was a Saturday. DPI had no office hours on Saturdays. The district filed its petition for review in the circuit court on Thursday, September 12, the 28th day after DPI’s decision. The district served a copy of the petition on DPI by certified mail on the following Monday, September 16, the 32nd day. The issue for the court was whether next-business-day service was timely under Wis. Stat. § 227.53(1)(a), Wisconsin’s general statute governing review of administrative decisions.

The statute does not explicitly answer the question, so the court considered two other statutes, the civil-procedure rule for counting time in Wis. Stat. § 801.15 and the general rule of statutory construction in Wis. Stat. § 990.001(4).

The court chose not to apply § 801.15 because the parties’ arguments related to it were not well developed. This was a surprising decision, given that § 801.15 likely trumps § 990.001(4) explicitly.

In any event, the court explained that § 990.001(4) provides that “when the last day to accomplish any of the listed acts, including ‘service upon’ a government entity, falls on a Saturday, and the government entity has no official office hours on that day, service may be accomplished on the next business day.” DPI had no office hours on Saturday, so service on the next Monday was timely.

But, DPI argued, service was accomplished by certified mail; while in-person service could not have been accomplished on Saturday (DPI was closed), service by certified mail could have. The court rejected this argument. The statute did not distinguish between types of service. The court preferred the bright-line rule that it saw in the statute: Regardless of the method of service, if the last day to serve an agency fell on a Saturday when the agency was closed, service on the next Monday was timely.

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.

Related Services

Insights

Do You Know What IMMEX Stands For?
16 July 2019
Dashboard Insights
Does The U.S. Need STRONGER Patents?
16 July 2019
PTAB Trial Insights
California Establishes Fund to Combat Wildfire Threats
15 July 2019
Renewable Energy Outlook
There’s No Place Like Home – But Is That a Reasonable Accommodation?
15 July 2019
Labor & Employment Law Perspectives
Review of 2020 Medicare Changes for Telehealth
11 December 2019
Member Call
2019 NDI Executive Exchange
14-15 November 2019
Chicago, IL
MAGI’s Clinical Research Conference
29 October 2019
Las Vegas, NV
Association for Corporate Counsel Annual Meeting 2019
27-30 October 2019
Phoenix, AZ