Mickelson v. Workforce Safety and Insurance
James Mickelson, Appellant
North Dakota Workforce
Safety and Insurance, Appellee
Gratech Company, Ltd., Respondent
South Central Judicial District,
Judge Bruce A. Romanick
|Nature of Action:||Workers Compensation|
|Term:||12/2011  Argument: 12/05/2011|
|ND cite:||2012 ND 164|
820 N.W.2d 333
Listen to recording of oral argument in MP3 format
Appellant's Statement of the Issues:|
 Whether Mickelson's degenerative disc disease is compensable under the Act, given the findings by WSI that Mickelson's degenerative disc disease was asymptomatic prior to his repetitive employment injury, and his back pain worsened by his employment.
 Whether Mickelson sustained a compensable soft tissue injury to the low back and pelvis.
 Whether the ALJ provided adequate reasons for rejecting evidence favorable to Mickelson, and whether the ALJ appropriately deferred to his treating doctors opinions.
 Whether Mickelson's failure to provide notice to the employer of his repetitive injury within seven days of his first doctor's visit provides grounds to deny that Mickelson sustained a compensable injury.
Appellee's Statement of the Issues:
1.Whether the Administrative Law Judge properly applied N.D.C.C. 65-01-02(10)(b)(7) to determine compensability of Mickelson's claim.
2.Whether the Administrative Law Judge could reasonably determine that Mickelson failed to establish a compensable injury to his lumbar spine.
3.Whether the Administrative Law Judge could reasonably determine that it was proper to consider Mickelson's failure to notify the employer of the general nature of his injury under N.D.C.C. 65-05-01.2.
|Add Docket 20110232 RSS|
|1||08/12/2011 NOTICE OF APPEAL: 08/10/2011|
|2||08/12/2011 No Transcript on Appeal|
|3||08/15/2011 DISK - Adm. Hrg Transcript dated September 2, 2010|
|4||09/16/2011 ELECTRONIC RECORD ON APPEAL (ENTRY NOS. 1-24).|
|5||09/19/2011 APPELLANT BRIEF (e-filed) PDF|
|6||09/19/2011 E-FILED BRIEF (PDF)|
|7||09/19/2011 APPELLANT APPENDIX (e-filed)|
|8||09/19/2011 E-FILED APPENDIX (ATA)|
|9||09/20/2011 Received $25 e-filing surcharge for ATB (Receipt #20672).|
|10||09/22/2011 Received 7 copies of ATB from Central Duplicating.|
|11||09/22/2011 Received 6 copies of ATA from Central Duplicating.|
|12||10/14/2011 APPELLEE BRIEF (e-filed)|
|13||10/14/2011 E-FILED BRIEF (AEB)|
|14||10/14/2011 APPELLEE APPENDIX (e-filed)|
|15||10/14/2011 E-FILED APPENDIX (AEA)|
|16||10/17/2011 RECEIVED $25 E-FILING SURCHARGE FOR AEB (RECEIPT #20712).|
|17||10/19/2011 Received 7 copies of AEB from Central Duplicating.|
|18||10/19/2011 Received 6 copies of AEA from Central Duplicating.|
|19||10/27/2011 REPLY BRIEF (e-filed) PDF|
|20||10/27/2011 E-FILED BRIEF (RYB) PDF|
|21||10/28/2011 Received 7 copies of RYB from Central Duplicating.|
|22||11/16/2011 NOTICE OF ORAL ARGUMENT SENT|
|23||12/05/2011 APPEARANCES: Dean J. Haas/Jacqueline S. Anderson|
|24||12/05/2011 ARGUED: Haas/Anderson|
|25||12/05/2011 ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST|
|26||08/16/2012 DISPOSITION: REVERSED AND REMANDED|
|27||08/16/2012 SPLIT OPINION: Kapsner, Carol Ronning|
|28||08/16/2012 CONCURRING SPECIALLY: VandeWalle, Gerald W.: CONCUR|
|29||08/16/2012 CONCURRING IN PART AND DISSENTING IN PART: Crothers, Daniel John: CON/RES|
|30||08/16/2012 JOINING IN THE CONCURRING IN PART AND DISSENTING IN PART: Sandstrom, Dale V.: JN/CON|
|31||08/16/2012 Cost on appeal taxed in favor of Appellant under N.D.C.C. 65-10-03.|
|32||08/17/2012 Judgment Sent to Parties|