Wanner v. N.D. Workers Comp. Bureau
Marvin Wanner, Claimant and Appellant
North Dakota Workers
Compensation Bureau, Appellee
Southwest Judicial District,
Judge Zane Anderson
|Nature of Action:||Workers Compensation|
|Term:||09/2002  Argument: 09/05/2002|
|ND cite:||2002 ND 201|
654 N.W.2d 760
Listen to recording of oral argument in MP3 format
Appellant's Statement of the Issues:|
I. The bureau erred in using a preponderance of evidence standard rather than a clear and convincing evidence standard to prove a false statement pursuant to section 65-05-33 N.D.C.C.
II. The bureau erred in accepting and relying on the investigation and testimony of private investigator Don Schneider.
III. The bureau erred in finding that Wanner willfully made false statements regarding income from his vegetable garden.
IV. The bureau erred in finding that Wanner willfully made false statements regarding his activities at the Roller farm.
V. Wanner's statements on his monthly reports to the bureau were not material to forfeiture of future benefits.
Vi. The forfeiture of all future disability and medical benefits violates the contract between an injured worker and the state for sure and certain relief.
Appellee's Statement of the Issues:
1. Did Marvin Wanner wilfully fail to report income and work activities to North Dakota Workers Compensation?
2. Were Marvin Wanner's false statements to North Dakota Workers Compensation material.?
3. Does the application of NDCC 65-05-33 to deny Marvin Wanner future benefits deny sure and certain relief?
4. Does NDCC 65-05-33 require North Dakota Workers Compensation to prove a false statement by clear and convincing evidence or merely by a preponderance of the evidence?
5. Did North Dakota Workers Compensation improperly rely on the evidence offered by its investigator?
|Add Docket 20020080 RSS|
|1||03/22/2002 NOTICE OF APPEAL: 03/21/2002|
|2||04/19/2002 RECORD ON APPEAL, Worker's Comp. Record (2 Vols.) & Supplemental Worker's Comp. Record,|
|3||04/19/2002 Depositions (2), Transcripts (2), & Video Tapes (4)|
|4||04/23/2002 DISK - TRA's of Hearings dated August 29, 2000 and November 8, 2000|
|5||04/23/2002 Ltr from Lori Steckler of Zuger Kirmis & Smith stating Mr. Lawrence A. Dopson is replacing Mr.|
|6||04/23/2002 Lawrence King as counsel for AE. dtd 4-23-02|
|7||04/30/2002 APPELLANT BRIEF|
|8||04/30/2002 APPELLANT APPENDIX|
|9||05/02/2002 DISK - ATB (e-mailed)|
|10||05/23/2002 REQ. EXT/TIME APPELLEE BRIEF (faxed letter dated 5-23-02)|
|11||05/23/2002 ACTION BY CLERK. Granted: 06/11/2002|
|12||05/28/2002 Original letter dated May 23, 2002, requesting extension of time|
|13||06/11/2002 APPELLEE BRIEF|
|14||06/11/2002 APPELLEE APPENDIX|
|15||06/11/2002 DISK - AEB|
|16||06/20/2002 REPLY BRIEF|
|17||06/20/2002 DISK - RYB (e-mailed)|
|18||09/05/2002 APPEARANCES: Steven L. Latham; Lawrence E. King|
|19||09/05/2002 ARGUED: Latham; King (Vol. Y; Page 18)|
|20||09/05/2002 ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST|
|21||10/15/2002 Notice of Substitution of Counsel (Lawrence King substituted for Larry Dopson)|
|22||12/20/2002 DISPOSITION: REVERSED AND REMANDED|
|23||12/20/2002 SPLIT OPINION: Maring, Mary Muehlen|
|24||12/20/2002 CONCURRING IN RESULT: VandeWalle, Gerald W.: CON/RES|
|25||12/20/2002 (CONCUR): Neumann, William A.: CONCUR|
|26||12/20/2002 (DISSENT): Sandstrom, Dale V.: DISSENT|
|27||12/20/2002 (JOIN DISSENT): Kapsner, Carol Ronning: JN/DIS|
|28||12/20/2002 Costs on appeal taxed under Section 65-10-03, N.D.C.C.|
|29||12/24/2002 Order/Judgment Mailed to Parties|
|31||01/21/2003 RECEIPT SIGNED BY DISTRICT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE|
|32||07/14/2008 EXPUNGED - Nonpermanent record items destroyed|