Workers Compensation

Carroll v. N.D. Workforce Safety & Insurance , 2008 ND 139,
For the district court to acquire subject matter jurisdiction over an appeal from a decision of an administrative agency, the appellant must satisfy the statutory requirements for perfecting the appeal.
A workers compensation claimant disputing a managed care decision must appeal from a binding dispute resolution decision, and the decision is reviewable only if the employee has been denied medical treatment.
Reopelle v. Workforce Safety and Insurance , 2008 ND 98, 748 N.W.2d 722
Unless otherwise provided, statutes in effect on the date of an injury govern a claimant's right to collect workers compensation benefits.
The five-year limit for partial disability benefits applies to claimants who have partial loss of earnings capacity occurring after June 30, 1991.
Manske v. Workforce Safety and Insurance , 2008 ND 79, 748 N.W.2d 394
A worker's employment need not be the sole cause of injury to be compensable. It is sufficient if a work condition is a substantial contributing factor to the disease.
The fact that an employee may have physical conditions or personal habits which make him or her more prone to such an injury does not constitute a sufficient reason for denying a claim.
Haugenoe v. Workforce Safety and Insurance , 2008 ND 78, 748 N.W.2d 378
Section 65-01-09, N.D.C.C., does not grant WSI a subrogation interest in an injured worker's legal malpractice claim against an attorney who committed malpractice in handling the injured worker's claim against a third-party tortfeasor.
Olson v. Workforce Safety and Insurance , 2008 ND 59, 747 N.W.2d 71
Under the 2003 version of N.D.C.C. 65-01-02(5)(b), the calculation of a self-employed worker's average weekly wage was based upon the net profit shown on Schedule C of his preceding year's tax return.
Nagel v. Workforce Safety and Ins. , 2007 ND 202, 743 N.W.2d 112
Equitable estoppel may be applied to bar an assertion that a claim was untimely under N.D.C.C. 65-05-01.
In certain situations, such as a relapse of a condition caused by a work-related injury, the disallowance of a workers compensation claim following relapse may be a notifying event which ends the tolling of the statute of limitations for the injured worker.
Swenson v. Workforce Safety and Insurance Fund , 2007 ND 149, 738 N.W.2d 892
A claimant must prove by objective medical evidence that he suffered a compensable injury. Objective medical evidence may include a physician's medical opinion based on an examination, a patient's medical history, and the physician's education and experience.
Although a medical opinion supported by a treatise or other scientific authority may be more persuasive, physicians are not required to offer such support.
Tedford v. Workforce Safety and Insurance , 2007 ND 142, 738 N.W.2d 29
The retirement offset provision, N.D.C.C. 65-05-09.2, authorizing offset of social security retirement benefits against workers compensation disability benefits, does not apply to injured employees who were receiving benefits for a total disability prior to the statute's effective date.
In determining whether an administrative agency acted without substantial justification, triggering an award of actual attorney fees and costs under N.D.C.C. 28-32-50(1), the fact that a judge at an earlier stage of the proceedings agreed with the agency's position is persuasive evidence that the position was substantially justified.
Deraas v. Workforce Safety and Insurance , 2007 ND 70, 734 N.W.2d 342
District court judgment affirming a Workforce Safety & Insurance order is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(5).
Olsson v. Workforce Safety and Insurance , 2007 ND 58, 734 N.W.2d 342
A district court judgment affirming the decision of Workforce Safety and Insurance is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(5).
Fettig v. Workforce Safety and Insurance , 2007 ND 23, 728 N.W.2d 301
To trigger the civil penalties for making a false statement in connection with a claim for WSI benefits, WSI must prove: (1) there is a false claim or statement; (2) the false claim or statement is willfully made; and (3) the false claim or statement is made in connection with any claim or application for benefits.
Based upon the civil penalty sought, there are two tests to determine the "materiality of a false statement." If WSI seeks reimbursement for benefits paid, the level of materiality required is proof by WSI that the false claim or false statement caused the benefits to be paid in error. If WSI seeks only forfeiture of future benefits, however, no such causal connection is required.
Aga v. Workforce Safety and Insurance , 2006 ND 254, 725 N.W.2d 204
Claimants reapplying for disability benefits have the burden of showing a significant change in their compensable medical condition and an actual wage loss caused by the significant change in their condition.
Genter v. Workforce Safety & Ins. Fund , 2006 ND 237, 724 N.W.2d 132
Workforce Safety and Insurance must determine whether a medical assessment team is required in a particular case based on the nature of the claimed injury.
If a medical assessment team is required to evaluate an injury, Workforce Safety and Insurance has the discretion to determine the composition of the team on a case-by-case basis.
Tverberg v. Workforce Safety & Insurance , 2006 ND 229, 723 N.W.2d 676
The rehabilitation provisions of workers compensation law are intended to return injured workers to substantial gainful employment with a minium of retraining as soon as possible after a work injury, but those provisions do not require complete rehabilitation to preinjury earning capacity.
Section 65-05.1-01(6), N.D.C.C., applies if a vocational consultant determines that none of the priority options under N.D.C.C. 65-05.1-01(4) are viable and will not return the employee to the lesser of two-thirds of the average weekly wage or ninety percent of the employee's preinjury earnings.
Partial disability benefits are to be awarded based on a calculation for retained earnings capacity, and WSI may use a statewide job pool to calculate the employee's retained earnings capacity.
Rojas v. Workforce Safety and Ins. , 2006 ND 221, 723 N.W.2d 403
An injured employee is entitled to an award of reasonable attorney's fees when Workforce Safety and Insurance acts without substantial justification in reducing or denying the employee's benefits.
Forbes v. Workforce Safety & Ins. , 2006 ND 208, 722 N.W.2d 536
In an administrative appeal, the Court determines only whether a reasoning mind reasonably could have determined that the factual conclusions reached were proved by the weight of the evidence from the entire record.
To trigger the civil penalties for making a false statement in connection with a claim for WSI benefits, WSI must prove: (1) there is a false claim or statement; (2) the false claim or statement is willfully made; and (3) the false claim or statement is made in connection with any claim or application for benefits.
Based upon the civil penalty sought, there are two tests to determine the "materiality of a false statement." If WSI seeks reimbursement for benefits paid, the level of materiality required is proof by WSI that the false claim or false statement caused the benefits to be paid in error. If WSI seeks only forfeiture of future benefits, however, no such causal connection is required.
Thurn v. Workforce Safety and Insurance , 2006 ND 202, 725 N.W.2d 588
An order of Workforce Safety and Insurance denying workers compensation benefits is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(5).
Stenvold v. Workforce Safety & Insurance , 2006 ND 197, 722 N.W.2d 365
An administrative agency generally may not consider evidence which has not been offered, admitted, and made a part of the official record of the administrative proceeding.
The district court's appellate review of an administrative agency decision is limited to the agency record filed with the court.
Ziesch v. Workforce Safety & Insurance , 2006 ND 99, 713 N.W.2d 525
Workforce Safety and Insurance's practice of awarding lump sum disability benefits for a closed, limited time and simultaneously issuing a retroactive notice of intention to discontinue benefits does not violate due process if the claimant was not receiving ongoing disability benefits at the time of WSI's decision.
The purpose of administrative res judicata is to preserve resources and avoid wasteful expense and delay.
Toso v. Workforce Safety & Insurance , 2006 ND 70, 712 N.W.2d 312
No relief can be granted when the record in the case provides no evidence to make determinations that must be made in order to grant or deny a request.
Thompson v. Workforce Safety and Insurance , 2006 ND 69, 712 N.W.2d 309
When reviewing the decision of an administrative agency, courts do not make independent findings of fact or substitute their judgment for that of the agency, but determine whether a reasoning mind could reasonably have determined that the factual conclusions reached were supported by the weight of the record.
If the decision of the administrative agency was consistent with the opinion of the sole testifying physician, the agency's decision was supported by the weight of the record.
Victor v. Workforce Safety & Insurance , 2006 ND 68, 711 N.W.2d 188
Workforce Safety and Insurance has discretion in determining what rehabilitative services are reasonably necessary and a reasoning mind reasonably could have decided that a $10,000 animal hoist was not a reasonably necessary rehabilitative service for a worker employed at a dog grooming business.
Stein v. Workforce Safety and Ins. , 2006 ND 34, 710 N.W.2d 364
A court cannot ignore the clear language of a statute under the guise of liberal construction.
A recalculation of average weekly wage under N.D.C.C. 65-05-09(1) is authorized only if the employee is able to return to employment for twelve consecutive months or more before the recurrence of the disability that is the subject of the recalculation.
Bjerklie v. Workforce Safety and Insurance , 2005 ND 178, 704 N.W.2d 818
In an administrative appeal, only issues properly raised before the agency will be reviewed on appeal.
The Administrative Agencies Practice Act requires that alleged errors be specifically enumerated for the district court.
An administrative agency's decision will be summarily affirmed if the appellant fails to specifically identify any error with particularity.
A workers compensation claimant has good cause for not attending an independent medical examination if the claimant has a reason that would cause a reasonably prudent person to refuse to attend under the same or similar circumstances.
When a workers compensation claimant who has a reasonable opportunity to inform WSI that she cannot attend an independent medical examination fails to do so, the claimant's responsibility to cooperate with WSI has not been fulfilled, the claimant has not communicated properly with WSI, the claimant does not have good cause to not attend the IME, and the claimant has failed to comply with rehabilitation requirements.
Rojas v. Workforce Safety and Insurance , 2005 ND 147, 703 N.W.2d 299
Before a claimant's continuing workers compensation disability benefits may be terminated, WSI must provide pretermination notice of the contemplated action, a summary of the evidence supporting termination, and a meaningful pretermination opportunity to respond in writing to the alleged grounds for termination.
A notice of intent to discontinue benefits and of the claimant's opportunity to respond sent to the claimant by regular mail is insufficient to guarantee due process when the presumption of receipt under N.D.C.C. 31-11-03(24) has been rebutted and it is determined the claimant never received the notice.
Houn v. Workforce Safety and Insurance , 2005 ND 115, 698 N.W.2d 271
Section 65-05-08(1), N.D.C.C., applies to reapplications for disability benefits after disability benefits previously have been discontinued and does not apply to applications when a claimant has not previously received disability benefits.
Sorlie v. Workforce Safety and Insurance , 2005 ND 83, 695 N.W.2d 453
The pretermination due process procedures for terminating disability benefits do not apply to a lump-sum award.
Claimants reapplying for disability benefits must show both a significant change in their medical condition and an actual wage loss caused by the significant change in their compensable medical condition.
Thomas v. Workforce Safety and Insurance , 2005 ND 52, 692 N.W.2d 901
A willful failure to give a maximum consistent effort in a functional capacity assessment can constitute noncompliance with vocational rehabilitation.
Workforce Safety and Insurance must adequately explain the reasons for disregarding medical evidence favorable to a claimant.
Ringsaker v. Workforce Safety & Insurance Fund , 2005 ND 44, 693 N.W.2d 14
An injured employee seeking workers compensation benefits must file a claim within one year after the injury. The date of injury is the first date that a reasonable person knew or should have known that he had suffered a work-related injury and has either lost wages because of a resulting disability or received medical treatment.
Vogel v. Workforce Safety and Insurance , 2005 ND 43, 693 N.W.2d 8
In appeals from administrative agency decisions, challenged findings of fact are affirmed when supported by a preponderance of the evidence.
Questions of law are fully reviewable on appeal from an administrative decision.
A reviewing court defers to a hearing officer's unique opportunity to judge the credibility of witnesses.
Beckler v. Workforce Safety and Insurance , 2005 ND 33, 692 N.W.2d 483
A claimant seeking reinstatement of discontinued disability benefits must show a significant change in his compensable medical condition and an actual wage loss caused by the change in medical condition.
To prove actual wage loss, a claimant must show that he was earning wages from employment when the change in his medical condition occurred.
An appeal of an administrative agency decision invokes the appellate jurisdiction of the district court, and the court's review must be based only on the administrative record filed with the court.
Baity v. Workforce Safety & Insurance , 2004 ND 184, 687 N.W.2d 714
Supplementary disability benefits may be awarded only after Workforce Safety and Insurance has determined the claimant is incapable of rehabilitation of earnings capacity and is therefore permanently and totally disabled.
An agency's systemic disregard of the law may warrant reversing the agency decision without a showing of prejudice by the party relying on the improper conduct, but evidence of a single improper act is not sufficient to establish systemic disregard.
Miller v. Workforce Safety and Insurance , 2006 ND 1, 707 N.W.2d 809
Ex parte communications are those that are without notice and opportunity for all parties to participate in the communication.
Workforce Safety and Insurance can consult with its outside legal counsel in reviewing a pending administrative law judge's recommendation as long as those communications are not ex parte.
Miller v. Workforce Safety and Insurance , 2004 ND 155, 684 N.W.2d 641
Ex parte communications are those that are without notice and opportunity for all parties to participate in the communication.
Workforce Safety and Insurance can consult with its outside legal counsel in reviewing a pending administrative law judge's recommendation as long as those communications are not ex parte.
Zander v. Workforce Safety and Insurance , 2003 ND 194, 672 N.W.2d 668
Clear and convincing evidence means evidence which leads to a firm belief or conviction that the allegations are true.
Benson v. Workforce Safety and Insurance , 2003 ND 193, 672 N.W.2d 640
If an appellant fails to serve the notice of appeal from an administrative order to the district court as required by the Administrative Agencies Practice Act, the district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction and the appeal must be dismissed.
Paul v. Workforce Safety and Insurance , 2003 ND 188, 671 N.W.2d 795
The vocational rehabilitation statutes are designed to return an injured employee to substantial gainful employment as quickly and with as little retraining as possible.
Workforce Safety and Insurance's decision to terminate rehabilitation benefits must be based upon evidence that jobs exist which provide the applicant a reasonable opportunity for employment and not on a burden-shifting presumption that such jobs exist.
Elshaug v. Workforce Safety and Insurance , 2003 ND 177, 671 N.W.2d 784
A claimant has the burden of proving a right to receive workers compensation benefits or to continued benefits if they are terminated after liability for a claim has been accepted.
A claimant must establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the medical condition for which benefits are sought is causally related to a work injury.
Barnes v. Workforce Safety and Insurance , 2003 ND 141, 668 N.W.2d 290
Nothing in the Rules of Evidence or the statutes governing administrative procedure precludes an employee of an agency from testifying as an expert witness in an administrative proceeding before the agency.
Ringsaker v. Workforce Safety and Insurance , 2003 ND 122, 666 N.W.2d 448
Litigants have a duty to comply with clearly communicated case-management orders.
Service of a brief by mail is complete upon mailing, but filing requires actual receipt.
A trial court may take any appropriate action against any person failing to perform an act required by court order.
Bachmeier v. Workers Comp. , 2003 ND 63, 660 N.W.2d 217
A claimant who files a reapplication seeking a resumption of discontinued disability benefits must prove an actual wage loss caused by a significant change in the compensable medical condition.
A claimant who was not working and had not sought employment before or after a change in his compensable medical condition did not incur an actual wage loss.
Lesmeister v. ND Workers Comp. , 2003 ND 60, 659 N.W.2d 350
A claimant reapplying for workers compensation benefits must prove she has sustained an actual wage loss caused by a significant change in her compensable medical condition.
A claimant who is terminated for misconduct does not sustain an actual wage loss caused by a significant change in medical condition.
Gronfur v. Workers Comp. , 2003 ND 42, 658 N.W.2d 337
When reapplying to resume discontinued disability benefits, a claimant must prove an actual wage loss caused by a significant change in the compensable medical condition.
For an actual wage loss, a claimant must have been earning wages from employment when the change in medical condition occurred causing at least a partial loss of those wages.
Downing v. ND Workers Comp. , 2003 ND 2, 660 N.W.2d 232
Judgment of the district court affirming a final order of the North Dakota Workers Compensation Bureau is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(7).
Wanner v. N.D. Workers Comp. Bureau , 2002 ND 201, 654 N.W.2d 760
While a failure to report income from work is material to the Bureau's ability to determine a claimant's entitlement to benefits and to calculate the amount of benefits, a failure to report money received apart from work is not similarly material
Absent a statutory or administrative definition of "work," an ordinary person would reasonably expect to have to report as work only activities performed in regular employment by others for remuneration, or showing an ability to regularly perform a gainful occupation, and would not ordinarily expect to have to report casual activities not done for remuneration and not performed for an employer.
Myhre v. ND Workers Comp. , 2002 ND 186, 653 N.W.2d 705
A claimant seeking benefits from the workers compensation fund must establish by a preponderance of the evidence a causal relationship between her employment and the medical condition for which benefits are sought.
To have a "compensable injury" under N.D.C.C. 65-01-02(11)(b)(7), a claimant must show the employment substantially accelerated the progression or substantially worsened the severity of a preexisting injury, disease, or other condition.
Meljie v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 2002 ND 174, 653 N.W.2d 62
For determining a worker's average weekly wage for receiving a disability benefit, "seasonal employment" includes an occupation that has periods of forty-five consecutive days of not receiving wages.
Under the 1997 version of N.D.C.C. 65-05-09, a disabled employee is entitled to a weekly benefit equal to two-thirds of the employee's gross weekly wage, subject to a minimum of sixty percent of the state's average weekly wage, but not to exceed one-hundred percent of the employee's preinjury net weekly wage, after deducting social security and federal income tax.
Hoffman v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 2002 ND 138, 651 N.W.2d 601
The Workers Compensation Bureau has an obligation to explain its disregard of evidence favorable to a claimant.
A willful failure to give a maximum consistent effort during a functional capacity evaluation can constitute an act of noncompliance with vocational rehabilitation.
Sjostrand v. ND Workers Comp. , 2002 ND 125, 649 N.W.2d 537
The Workers Compensation Bureau's termination of an injured worker's disability benefits for a false claim or false statement, without first providing an opportunity for an evidentiary hearing, does not violate the worker's right to due process of law.
The Bureau's findings on a false claim or false statement must be affirmed if they are supported by a preponderance of the evidence.
Rush v. ND Workers Comp. , 2002 ND 129, 649 N.W.2d 207
A claimant seeking benefits from the workers compensation fund must establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the medical condition for which benefits are sought is causally related to the work injury.
Paul v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 2001 ND 96, 644 N.W.2d 884
The Bureau has the burden of establishing that a vocational rehabilitation plan provides a claimant with a reasonable opportunity to obtain employment.
Shiek v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 2002 ND 85, 643 N.W.2d 721
When a claimant receives a prior and a subsequent permanent impairment award, the overall number of weeks the claimant is entitled to receive for both the prior and subsequent impairments is the number of weeks that corresponds to the combined value of the prior and subsequent impairments on a whole body basis.
Klein v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 2001 ND 170, 634 N.W.2d 530
The time period to file a claim for worker's compensation benefits begins on the first day a reasonable person, not learned in medicine, knew or should have known that the injury was work related.
Shiek v. ND Workers Comp. , 634 N.W.2d 493 (N.D. 2001)
Under the 1991 version of N.D.C.C. 65-05-09.3, claimants who become permanently and totally disabled on or before their intended retirement are eligible for disability benefits after that date.
Wright v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 2001 ND 72, 625 N.W.2d 256
Under the Administrative Agencies Practice Act, N.D.C.C. ch. 28-32, information or evidence that has not been offered, admitted, and made a part of the official record of the proceeding generally is not considered by the administrative agency. N.D.C.C. 28-32-06(2).
An injured employee who has undergone vocational rehabilitation is responsible for making a good faith work search.
To be eligible for partial disability benefits, an injured employee must provide evidence of a loss of earning capacity.
Horsley v. ND Workers Comp. , 2001 ND 60, 623 N.W.2d 377
Before a valid judgment can be entered, an order for judgment is required.
An appeal may be taken from a judgment entered without an order for entry of judgment if the trial court intended to dispose of the case and intended that a judgment be entered and if an order for judgment is implicit in the trial court's memorandum opinion.
Snyder v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 2001 ND 38, 622 N.W.2d 712
Unless otherwise provided, statutes in effect on the date of an injury govern workers compensation benefits.
Words not defined in a statute are to be understood in their ordinary sense.
If the Workers Compensation Bureau seeks reimbursement for benefits paid, the level of materiality required is proof a false claim or false statement caused the benefits to be paid in error.
A false claim or false statement is sufficiently material for forfeiture of future benefits if it could have misled the Bureau or medical experts in a determination of the claim.
Aalund v. ND Workers Comp. , 2001 ND 32, 622 N.W.2d 210
The failure to give the N.D.C.C. 28-32-11 perjury admonition in a discovery deposition does not preclude the admission of the deposition at an administrative hearing.
In appeals from administrative agencies, courts generally may consider only those issues identified in the specifications of error.
Section 65-05-33, N.D.C.C., authorizes the forfeiture of any additional benefits if a claimant willfully makes a material false statement regarding a claim for benefits.
Wanstrom v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 2001 ND 21, 621 N.W.2d 864
The presumption that a firefighter's lung disease was suffered in the line of duty is based on a legislatively adopted premise that a firefighter's occupational exposure to smoke causes lung disease, and the presumption cannot be rebutted by expert medical opinion rejecting that underlying premise.
Jacobson v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 2000 ND 225, 621 N.W.2d 141
A willful false claim or false statement is sufficiently material for forfeiture of future benefits if it is a statement which could have misled the Bureau in a determination of the claim.
Before terminating a claimant's disability benefits, due process requires the Bureau to give the claimant pre-termination notice of its intent to terminate benefits, a summary of the evidence, and an opportunity to respond. The post-deprivation hearing must be provided at a meaningful time, as required by the due process clause.
Berger v. ND Workers Comp. , 2000 ND 224, 620 N.W.2d 576
An owner of a business is not entitled to workers compensation benefits without securing optional coverage.
In determining whether a claimant was an employee or an owner when he was injured, the rules for determining whether a person is an independent contractor or an employee, do not apply, and the Bureau may consider other evidence or factors.
Robertson v. ND Workers Comp. Bur. , 2000 ND 167, 616 N.W.2d 844
The presumption that a law enforcement officer's heart disease was suffered in the line of duty is based on a legislatively adopted premise that a law enforcement officer's work stress causes heart disease, and the presumption cannot be rebutted by expert medical opinion rejecting that underlying premise.
Holen v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 2000 ND 145, 615 N.W.2d 141
A claimant must demonstrate substantial prejudice to recover relief for delay in administrative proceedings.
The Bureau must prove the claimant knew of specific work restrictions and intentionally engaged in activities exceeding those restrictions before it can deny benefits based on aggravation of a prior injury.
Tangen v. ND Workers Comp. , 2000 ND 135, 613 N.W.2d 490
Although the law in effect at the time of injury ordinarily governs workers compensation claims, the law in effect at the time of aggravation of a prior work injury governs a reapplication for disability benefits.
To deny aggravation benefits because the employee exceeded work restrictions, the Bureau must prove the claimant knew of the specific work restrictions and intentionally engaged in activities which exceeded those restrictions.
Hoffner v. ND Workers Comp. Bur. , 2000 ND 123, 612 N.W.2d 263
Generally, injuries sustained while traveling to and from work are not compensable under our Workers Compensation laws.
If an employee having fixed hours and place of work is not compensated for travel to the place of work, there is a strong presumption the travel to the place of work is not "employer required."
Substantial evidence is considered less than a preponderance.
Negaard-Cooley v. ND Workers Comp. , 2000 ND 122, 611 N.W.2d 898
The Workers Compensation Bureau must clarify internal discrepancies in the report of an independent medical examination it relied on to deny a claim.
Horob v. Workers Comp. Bureau , 2000 ND 114, 611 N.W.2d 875
The Workers Compensation Bureau may consolidate two work injury claims arising out of separate accidents for administrative convenience, but it may not use the consolidation to order forfeiture of benefits for both injuries for false statements material to only one.
Peterson v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 2000 ND 99, 611 N.W.2d 875
The North Dakota Workers Compensation Bureau's order dismissing claim for benefits is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(5).
Hopfauf v. ND Workers Comp. , 2000 ND 94, 610 N.W.2d 60
A claimant who willfully makes a false statement or who receives disability benefits and willfully fails to notify the Workers Compensation Bureau of work or income from work must reimburse the Bureau for benefits paid, based upon the false statement, and forfeits any additional benefits relative to that injury.
In a second appeal, questions that could have been raised in a previous appeal will not be examined.
Lewis v. ND Workers Comp , 2000 ND 77, 609 N.W.2d 445
A motion for relief from judgment under N.D.R.Civ.P. 60(b) does not apply to an administrative appeal to district court.
Baier v. Workers Comp. Bureau , 2000 ND 78, 609 N.W.2d 722
When an agency issues a final order after a formal hearing, administrative res judicata bars the agency from raising in a subsequent proceeding issues which could have been raised in the first hearing.
Buchmann v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 2000 ND 79, 609 N.W.2d 437
Due process under the state and federal constitutions requires the Workers Compensation Bureau to give a claimant pre-termination notice of its intent to terminate disability benefits, a summary of the evidence supporting termination, and an opportunity to respond.
The Workers Compensation Bureau may weigh the evidence before it, although it may not pick and choose in an unreasonable manner.
Ash v. Traynor , 2000 ND 75, 609 N.W.2d 96
N.D.C.C. 65-02-08 prohibits an attorney from receiving double fees from a client and the Bureau for legal services rendered to the client in proceedings before the Bureau. The statute does not prohibit a client from entering a fee agreement with the attorney and then, upon prevailing in the case, seeking reimbursement from the Bureau, in the amount of the statutory fees allowed under the statute.
Mikkelson v. ND Workers Comp. Bur. , 2000 ND 67, 609 N.W.2d 74
A preexisting condition need not be active at the time of a compensable work injury to invoke the 1997 version of the aggravation statute.
To establish entitlement to disability benefits, the claimant must ensure that the claimant's doctor verify disability in a filed report containing the information required by statute.
Lawrence v. ND Workers Comp. , 2000 ND 60, 608 N.W.2d 254
The Workers Compensation Bureau may consult with its outside litigation counsel when reviewing a pending administrative law judge recommendation, but those consultations may not be ex parte.
An injured worker is justified in refusing a transitional job offer if a reasonably prudent person would refuse the offer under the same or similar circumstances.
Elshaug v. ND Workers Comp. Bur. , 2000 ND 42, 607 N.W.2d 568
Ex parte communications between the Workers Compensation Bureau's outside and in-house attorneys violate N.D.C.C. 28-32-12.1(3). An appropriate remedy for improper ex parte communication occurring after the ALJ recommends the Bureau deny a claim is to reverse the Bureau's denial of the claim and remand for an evidentiary rehearing.
Smith v. Workers Comp. , 2000 ND 51, 608 N.W.2d 250
Injury caused by the illegal use of a controlled substance is noncompensable under workers compensation law.
Siewert v. ND Workers Comp. , 2000 ND 33, 606 N.W.2d 501
Notice is adequate if it informs the party of the general nature of the questions to be heard.
Questions that could have been raised in a previous appeal will not be examined.
Sanctions for administrative delay are generally warranted only when a party has shown substantial prejudice from an unreasonable delay.
Wanstrom v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 2000 ND 17, 604 N.W.2d 860
Unless otherwise provided, the statutes in effect on the date of an injury govern workers compensation benefits.
Witcher v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 1999 ND 225, 602 N.W.2d 704
The Workers Compensation Bureau may offset previously paid impairment awards against subsequent impairment awards for other body parts if the previous awards are recalculated in a pending appeal.
Hein v. ND Workers Comp. Fund , 1999 ND 200, 601 N.W.2d 576
The Bureau weighs the credibility of conflicting medical evidence, but the Bureau must consider the entire record, clarify inconsistencies, and explain its reasons for disregarding medical evidence favorable to the claimant.
Boger v. Workers Comp. , 1999 ND 192, 600 N.W.2d 877
A Workers Compensation claimant must establish entitlement to disability benefits by a preponderance of the evidence.
The Bureau may weigh conflicting medical opinions and disregard evidence favorable to the claimant if it adequately explains its reason for doing so.
Renault v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 1999 ND 187, 601 N.W.2d 580
A Workers Compensation Bureau's finding a claimant willfully made material false statements about an injury will not be reversed unless the finding is not supported by a preponderance of the evidence.
Bjerke v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 1999 ND 180, 599 N.W.2d 329
A disability due to a work-related injury qualifies a claimant for workers compensation benefits, while a disability due to a non-work related injury or medical condition does not qualify a claimant for benefits.
A pretermination notice of termination of workers compensation benefits must be sufficiently detailed to frame the precise issues, delineate the Bureau's theories and rationale for terminating benefits, and summarize the significant evidence supporting the Bureau's conclusions.
Svedberg v. ND Workers Comp. , 1999 ND 181, 599 N.W.2d 323
A vocational rehabilitation plan must take into account all of the injured worker's functional limitations existing at the time of the injury, not only those directly caused by the current work injury.
Elter v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 1999 ND 179, 599 N.W.2d 315
The presumption a health impairment caused by lung or respiratory disease is work-related can be rebutted by showing the claimant's work, more likely, was not a significant contributing factor to the disease.
Under NDCC 65-10-03, when the district court remands for further proceedings, the appellant is entitled to attorneys fees for the initial appeal to the district court.
Stewart v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 1999 ND 174, 599 N.W.2d 280
Before terminating ongoing disability benefits, the Bureau must provide pretermination notice of its contemplated action, a summary of the evidence supporting the proposed termination, and an opportunity to respond to the alleged grounds for termination.
Saari v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 1999 ND 144, 598 N.W.2d 174
The right to workers compensation permanent partial impairment benefits vests on the date the impairment is determined, not on the date of injury or the date of maximum medical improvement.
Rights and obligations under the Workers Compensation Act are statutory, not contractual, in nature.
Vernon v. ND Workers Comp. , 1999 ND 153, 598 N.W.2d 139
The Workers Compensation Bureau must adequately explain its rationale for rejecting a hearing officer's recommendation.
Before terminating a claimant's disability benefits, due process requires the bureau to give the claimant pre-termination notice of its intent to terminate benefits, a summary of the evidence, and an opportunity to respond.
Unser v. ND Workers Comp. , 1999 ND 129, 598 N.W.2d 89
The willful failure to report outside sources of income to the Bureau results in forfeiture of all future benefits.
A willful failure to report income impedes the Bureau's process of determining benefit eligibility and is a material violation justifying reimbursement to the Bureau of benefits erroneously paid.
Bruns v. ND Workers Comp. , 1999 ND 116, 595 N.W.2d 298
The Workers Compensation aggravation statute, N.D.C.C. 65-05-15 (1995), applies when a "new" work injury combines with and aggravates a preexisting condition.
It is not necessary to prove "permanent impairment" as defined in N.D.C.C. 65-01-02(26) (1995) to establish "active impairment" under the aggravation statute.
Engebretson v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 1999 ND 112, 595 N.W.2d 312
Under the 1995 law, a claimant can recover benefits if the injury was substantially aggravated or accelerated by the employment.
Speculative evidence is insufficient when tests could show whether claimant's employment substantially aggravated or accelerated an injury.
Hoffman v. ND Workers Comp. , 1999 ND 66, 592 N.W.2d 533
In determining whether a vocational rehabilitation training program will return an injured worker to substantial gainful employment under N.D.C.C. 65-05.1-01(3), the validity of the program must be assessed based on the information the Bureau had before it at the time the Bureau selected the program.
A claimant has "good cause" under N.D.C.C. 65-05.1-04(6) for not attending an approved rehabilitation program if the claimant has a reason that would cause a reasonably prudent person to refuse to attend the rehabilitation program under the same or similar circumstances.
A claimant had "good cause" to not attend the approved rehabilitation program where the program would have required the claimant to maintain two households and the Bureau wrongfully denied the claimant a second domicile allowance.
Kerzman v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 1999 ND 44, 590 N.W.2d 888
A contractual stipulation must be construed as a whole to give meaning to each provision.
A workers compensation claimant may agree to forego future disability benefits in exchange for a lump sum settlement.
Under N.D.C.C. 28-32-12.2(1), a hearing officer means the entity presiding at an administrative hearing.
Vraa v. ND Workers Comp. , 1999 ND 6, 588 N.W.2d 857
For a claimant to be entitled to partial disability benefits under N.D.C.C. 65-05-10, there should be a partial physical disability and a loss of earning capacity causally related to the disability.
Under N.D.C.C. 65-05-28, an injured employee may not change doctors without prior authorization by the Workers Compensation Bureau, and failure to obtain approval renders the employee liable for the cost of the treatment.
Saakian v. ND Workers Comp. , 1998 ND 227, 587 N.W.2d 166
If a claimant is not unfairly surprised, had an opportunity to, and did, address the Workers Compensation Bureau's evidence on a disability question not precisely set forth in the specification of issues for an administrative hearing, the claimant has adequate notice that entitlement to disability benefits is an issue to be determined at the hearing on compensability of the claim.
Res judicata only prohibits relitigation of a claim or issue resolved by a final administrative decision.
The Bureau's adoption and amendment of an administrative law judge's recommendation does not transform the Bureau into a "hearing officer" for purposes of N.D.C.C. 28-32-12.2(1).
Scott v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 1998 ND 221, 587 N.W.2d 153
Section 28-32-12.1(3), N.D.C.C., prohibits ex parte communications after a hearing between the attorney who represented an agency at a hearing and the decision maker who will decide whether to adopt or reject the ALJ's recommended decision.
The Bureau's routine practice of improper ex parte communications constituted a systemic disregard of the law which warranted reversal.
Lee v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 1998 ND 218, 587 N.W.2d 423
Under N.D.C.C. 65-05-09.1, the Workers Compensation Bureau is entitled to offset one-half of social security benefits, less attorney fees, from a claimant's state disability payments.
The offset under the statute applies even though the Social Security Administration has offset all or part of a claimant's partial impairment award from her social security benefit.
Rodacker v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 1998 ND 209, 595 N.W.2d 602
Bureau's order terminating disability benefits summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(5).
Hibl v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 1998 ND 198, 586 N.W.2d 167
The Bureau weighs the credibility of conflicting medical evidence, but the Bureau must consider the entire record, clarify inconsistencies, and explain its reasons for disregarding medical evidence favorable to the claimant.
Lee v. ND Workers Comp. Bur. , 1998 ND 184, 595 N.W.2d 602
Bureau's order terminating disability and vocational rehabilitation benefits summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(5).
Lindell v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 1998 ND 174, 584 N.W.2d 520
The disability verification requirements under N.D.C.C. 65-05-08.1(2)(a-d) (1995) apply to a claimant's initial request for disability benefits.
A physician's report under N.D.C.C. 65-05-08.1 (1995) includes a physician's formal correspondence with the Bureau, but not attached office notes or medical records.
Zueger v. ND Workers Comp. , 1998 ND 175, 584 N.W.2d 530
A claimant's alleged failure to perform to the full extent of his abilities on a functional capacity evaluation is not a "false statement" under N.D.C.C. 65-05-33.
Ali v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 1998 ND 146, 583 N.W.2d 115
Under NDCC 65-05-28(4), the Bureau may suspend benefits (1) if the employee refuses to submit to, or intentionally obstructs, an "examination," or (2) if the employee refuses to reasonably participate in "treatment."
A functional capacity evaluation conducted to determine the employee's ability to return to work was an "examination," and did not constitute "treatment."
Geck v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 1998 ND 158, 583 N.W.2d 621
To have a "compensable injury" under N.D.C.C. 65-01-02(9)(b)(6) (1995), a claimant must show the employment substantially aggravated or accelerated the latent and underlying condition to produce the result for which compensation is sought.
The Supreme Court will reverse and remand if the Bureau does not adequately explain its disregard of medical evidence favorable to a claimant.
Eagle v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 1998 ND 154, 583 N.W.2d 97
The rational basis standard of review applies to an equal protection challenge to the limitations on vocational rehabilitation benefits under N.D.C.C. 65-05.1-01(3) and 65-05.1-06.1(2)(i)(1).
The rehabilitation limitations in N.D.C.C. 65-05.1-01(3) and 65-05.1-06.1(2)(i)(1) are rationally related to legitimate governmental purposes and do not violate the equal protection clauses of the state and federal constitutions.
Shiek v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 1998 ND 139, 582 N.W.2d 639
Under the pre-1995 version of the retirement presumption statute, N.D.C.C. 65-05-09.3, the claimant has the burden of proving he or she is permanently and totally disabled, and if the claimant does so, the burden shifts to the Bureau to prove the claimant is not permanently and totally disabled if it seeks to hold the claimant ineligible for further benefits.
Boger v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 1998 ND 131, 581 N.W.2d 463
After the Workers Compensation Bureau has issued an informal decision denying benefits and the claimant requests reconsideration and hearing, and an evidentiary hearing is held which results in a final order denying benefits, the claimant is statutorily entitled to request the Bureau to reconsider its final order.
Sherman v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 1998 ND 97, 578 N.W.2d 517
When the district court fails to follow recent controlling precedent and does not undertake the legislatively mandated review under N.D.C.C. ch. 65-10 and ch. 28-32, Supreme Court may reverse and remand to the district court for consideration on the merits.
Gregory v. ND Workers Comp. , 1998 ND 94, 578 N.W.2d 101
Under the 1995 version of NDCC 65-02-27, a worker who requests assistance from the Workers' Adviser Program is deemed to have requested an administrative hearing.
A request for a hearing constitutes a petition for reconsideration under NDCC 65-01-14(4).
An appeal is not moot if the court is able to give effective relief.
The 1995 version of NDCC 65-05-09.3(2), that canceled workers compensation permanent total disability benefits when the injured worker became eligible for social security retirement benefits, did not apply to a worker who was already receiving those benefits before the statute took effect.
Hoyem v. ND Workers Comp. , 1998 ND 86, 578 N.W.2d 117
Issues not raised before an administrative agency will not be considered for the first time on appeal.
Bureau's decision a claimant was not entitled to an impairment evaluation and rating for chronic pain and chronic pain syndrome was supported by a preponderance of the evidence.
Sprunk v. N.D. Workers Comp. , 1998 ND 93, 576 N.W.2d 861
An injured employee's doctor must report to the Workers Compensation Bureau when the employee reached maximum medical improvement, but the Bureau is not bound by that opinion.
An issue is not ripe for review if it depends on future contingencies which, although they might occur, necessarily may not, thus making addressing the question premature.
Loberg v. Workers Comp. , 1998 ND 64, 575 N.W.2d 221
The Supreme Court will reverse and remand a judgment affirming a Workers Compensation Bureau decision if the Court cannot determine whether the correct legal standard was applied by the ALJ.
The Workers Compensation Bureau must adequately explain its disregard of medical evidence favorable to a claimant.
Hopfauf v. N.D. Workers Comp. , 1998 ND 40, 575 N.W.2d 436
Remand is necessary where it is unclear whether ALJ correctly applied the law.
On appeal of an administrative agency order, the courts do not address issues not raised at administrative hearing and in specifications of error.
Freezon v. ND Workers Comp. , 1998 ND 23, 574 N.W.2d 577
An informal Bureau decision based on a claim form, medical records, and letters, and issued without the benefit of a formal evidentiary hearing, is not an appealable order.
Hust v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 1998 ND 20, 574 N.W.2d 808
The Bureau properly denies a claimant benefits when a preponderance of the evidence establishes claimant was substantially impaired by voluntary consumption of alcohol when injured and claimant's alcohol-induced impairment was a cause of the injury.
Flink v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 1998 ND 11, 574 N.W.2d 784
The Workers Compensation Bureau must adequately explain why contrary medical evidence is ignored and may not pick and choose information in an unreasonable manner.
Workers Compensation benefits will be reinstated when Bureau fails to properly develop a vocational plan or give proper notice of release to return to work.
McCarty v. ND Workers Comp. , 1998 ND 9, 574 N.W.2d 556
Absent new evidence, administrative res judicata precludes the Workers Compensation Bureau from reconsidering the question of whether the claimant made false statements that was or could have been raised in an earlier adjudicative proceeding.
Hausauer v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 1997 ND 243, 572 N.W.2d 426
The Bureau properly dismisses a workers' compensation claim where claimant willfully made material false statements in connection with his claim.
Cridland v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 1997 ND 223, 571 N.W.2d 351
In the absence of new evidence or a change in medical condition, a Bureau order awarding benefits for a work injury, entered with knowledge of a noncompensable injury and after a formal adjudicative hearing, is res judicata and precludes the Bureau from relitigating the effect of the noncompensable injury on a work injury.
Dietrich v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 1997 ND 198, 575 N.W.2d 224
Bureau's dismissal of an untimely claim summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1.
Fuhrman v. ND Workers Comp. , 1997 ND 191, 569 N.W.2d 269
A claimant for workers compensation benefits has good cause for failing to attend a rehabilitation program if the claimant has a reason that would cause a reasonably prudent person to refuse to attend the program under the same or similar circumstances.
A claimant who asserted financial inability to relocate for training in Minneapolis had good cause for not attending the training program approved by the Bureau, which made no investigation of the claimant's economic circumstances prior to terminating benefits.
Lende v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 1997 ND 178, 568 N.W.2d 755
N.D.C.C. 28-32-14(4) and 28-32-15(1) govern petitions for reconsideration of an order denying permanent partial impairment benefits. The Workers Compensation Bureau must take some affirmative action toward the arrangement of a formal hearing within thirty days of the filing of the petition for reconsideration under sections 28-32-14(4) and 28-32-15(1), or the order will become final and appealable. The Administrative Agencies Practice Act does not require the filing of a petition for reconsideration as a prerequisite for an appeal to district court under N.D.C.C. 28-32-14(4). The triggering event to start the thirty-day appeal period running under N.D.C.C. 28-32-15(1) is service of a "notice" of a final determination upon reconsideration.
Feist v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 1997 ND 177, 569 N.W.2d 1
The administrative law judge's decision in this case was a recommendation and was not a final order. NDCC 28-32-13(3) authorizes, but does not require, the Workers Compensation Bureau to adopt rules for review of a hearing officer's recommendation. If an administrative agency rejects a hearing officer's recommendation, it must explain its rationale for not following the recommendation. Because AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (3rd ed.) was the edition in existence when NDCC 65-05-12 was amended and reenacted in 1989, the Bureau properly applied it when the claimant's impairment was evaluated in 1994. The Bureau was authorized to combine the impairment ratings for the claimant's lumbar and cervical impairments.
Coleman v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 1997 ND 168, 567 N.W.2d 853
NDCC 65-05-12 and 65-01-02 adopted the edition of the AMA's Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment in existence at the time of their enactment.
McDaniel v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 1997 ND 154, 567 N.W.2d 833
Workers Compensation Bureau must prove firefighting was not a substantial contributing factor to a firefighter's occupational cancer before it can overcome the statutory presumption that the cancer was work related. When denying a claim, the Bureau must adequately explain why it disregards expert medical evidence favorable to the injured worker.
Dean v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 1997 ND 165, 567 N.W.2d 626
Workers Compensation Bureau could reasonably have reached its factual conclusion that an applicant for benefits intentionally made material false statements in connection with her claim.
McCollum v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 1997 ND 163, 567 N.W.2d 811
N.D.C.C. 65-05-12 and 65-01-02 adopted the edition of the AMA's Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment in existence at the time of their enactment.
Theige v. ND Workers Comp. , 1997 ND 160, 567 N.W.2d 334
The Bureau's finding of fact that the claimant had refused to participate in and obstructed medical treatment by failing to exert maximum effort on functional capacity evaluations was supported by a preponderance of the evidence.
Sowatzki v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 1997 ND 137, 567 N.W.2d 189
NDCC 28-32-21 only authorizes appeals to the Supreme Court from district court judgments in appeals from administrative agency orders. The question of the Bureau's authority to revoke a permanent partial impairment award and order repayment without first affording the claimant an opportunity to be heard, was a significant issue the district court should not have decided without complying with the provisions of NDCC Ch. 28-32.
Lang v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 1997 ND 133, 566 N.W.2d 801
Bureau's order denying re-application for disability benefits based on a significant change in claimant's medical condition reversed. Case remanded to Bureau to determine whether claimant's work related injuries caused aggravation of osteoarthritis sufficient to reinstate benefits.
McCabe v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 1997 ND 145, 567 N.W.2d 201
Workers Compensation statutes requiring permanent partial impairment to be evaluated using the most recent edition of the AMA's "Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment" meant the most recent edition when the statutes were enacted.
Little v. Traynor , 1997 ND 128, 565 N.W.2d 766
The Workers Compensation Bureau's adoption of an $85-per-hour maximum hourly rate and various fee caps to compensate a claimant's attorney in N.D.A.C. 92-01-02-11.1(1) and (3)(b) through (i) was based on an adequate administrative rulemaking record and was not an arbitrary or capricious application of its statutory authority. The Bureau's adoption in N.D.A.C. 92-01-02-11.1(9)(e) of a $100 limit for reimbursement of a claimant's reasonable and necessary costs, unless approved by the Bureau in advance of their accrual, was not beyond the scope of the Bureau's authority. The district court did not abuse its discretion in ordering the Bureau to pay the nonadministrative parties' attorney fees under N.D.C.C. 28-32-21.1 for responding to the Bureau's motion for leave to pursue discovery of irrelevant material.
Blanchard v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 1997 ND 118, 565 N.W.2d 485
Absent a bureau request for a designated administrative law judge to issue a final order, an administrative law judge's decision in a worker's compensation case was a recommendation. NDCC 28-32-13(3) authorizes, but does not require, the bureau to adopt rules for review of an administrative law judge's recommendation. The bureau must adequately explain its reason for rejecting an administrative law judge's recommendation and for disregarding medical evidence favorable to the claimant.
McArthur v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 1997 ND 105, 564 N.W.2d 655
An appeal from a notice of entry of judgment will be treated as an appeal from the judgment. An informal decision of the Workers Compensation Bureau is not appealable.
Jensen v. ND Workers Compensation , 1997 ND 107, 563 N.W.2d 112
Statutory amendments may not operate retrospectively to abrogate contractual or vested rights. 1989 amendment to 65-05-08, N.D.C.C., providing if workers compensation disability benefits are discontinued, a later award of benefits may not commence more than thirty days before the claimant's written notice of reapplication, irrespective of injury date, is not applicable to a claimant who had a vested right to resume receiving disability benefits when his compensable injury again became disabling and benefits suspended by the Bureau due to a recovery of damages in a third-party personal injury lawsuit were liquidated.
Wittmayer v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 1997 ND 106, 569 N.W.2d 288
Bureau's order terminating disability benefits affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(5).
Frohlich v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 556 N.W.2d 297 (N.D. 1996)
Under N.D.C.C. 65-05-08.1, the workers compensation bureau must request an updated medical report about the duration of a claimant's temporary total disability before terminating continuing benefits.
Lucier v. ND Workers Comp. , 556 N.W.2d 56 (N.D. 1996)
The Workers Compensation Bureau's finding that the claimant had a reasonable opportunity for substantial gainful employment was supported by a preponderance of the evidence.
The 'average weekly earnings at the time of injury' under Section 65-05.1-01(3), N.D.C.C., do not include employer-paid health insurance premiums. On Petitions for Rehearing.
Siewert v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 554 N.W.2d 465 (N.D. 1996)
The Bureau's finding the claimant was not injured in a work-related accident was not supported by the greater weight of the evidence.
A reasonable person could not conclude the employee was not injured in a work-related fall, even though there was evidence the worker may have faked some injury.
The Bureau cannot take a full adversary position against claimants, but must consider the entire record, clarify inconsistencies, and adequately explain its reasons for disregarding medical evidence favorable to the worker.
Baldock v. Workers Comp. , 554 N.W.2d 441 (N.D. 1996)
The rational basis standard of review applies to an equal protection challenge to the statutory scheme for rehabilitation benefits under the workers compensation law.
A workers compensation statute limiting rehabilitation retraining to the goal of returning an injured worker to a job paying at least seventy-five percent of the state average weekly wage did not violate equal protection rights of workers whose pre-injury earnings exceeded the statute's wage goal.
Vetter v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 554 N.W.2d 451 (N.D. 1996)
Any party filing specifications of error in an appeal from an administrative agency decision must comply with Section 28-32-15(4), N.D.C.C., by identifying what matters are truly at issue with sufficient specificity to fairly apprise the agency, other parties, and the court of the particular errors claimed.
Dean v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 554 N.W.2d 455 (N.D. 1996)
In an appeal from an administrative agency decision, 'boilerplate' specifications of error do not comply with the specificity requirements of Section 28-32-15(4), N.D.C.C. Applying that holding prospectively, the Supreme Court remanded to the district court to consider the appeal on its merits.
Swanson v. ND Workers Comp. , 553 N.W.2d 209 (N.D. 1996)
The claimant did not have standing to challenge the Workers Compensation Bureau's claimed lack of a peer review system. Under Section 65-05-07(3), N.D.C.C., only doctors or health care providers may appeal adverse Bureau decisions on 'reasonableness of fees and payment denials for unjustified treatments.'
Anderson v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 553 N.W.2d 496 (N.D. 1996)
The workers compensation claimant did not know or have reason to know she had a compensable work-related injury until her symptoms of carpel tunnel syndrome significantly worsened ten years after first being diagnosed.
Transystems Services v. Workers Comp. Burea , 550 N.W.2d 66 (N.D. 1996)
An appeal from a decision of the Workers Compensation Bureau must be taken to the district court of the county where the injury occurred or the claimant resides. cause of child abuse under Chapter 50-25.1, N.D.C.C., is a 'contested case' under Section 28-32-01(4), N.D.C.C., and the Department of Human Services bears the burden of proof.
To support a finding of probable cause of child abuse under Chapter 50-25.1, N.D.C.C., there must be evidence of serious physical harm or traumatic abuse, evidenced by negative changes in the child's health resulting from infliction of physical or mental injury.
The court erred in awarding attorney's fees for the proceedings at the administrative level, because attorney's fees under Section 28-32-21.1(1), N.D.C.C., are authorized only for those proceedings necessitated by the Department's unjustified actions.
Maginn v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 550 N.W.2d 412 (N.D. 1996)
The Workers Compensation Bureau did not err in denying further benefits to a claimant who failed to make a good faith work trial in a modified position with her former employer, as required by Section 65-05.1-04(4), N.D.C.C.
Vickery v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 545 N.W.2d 781 (N.D. 1996)
Symington v. North Dakota Workers Compensation Bureau , 545 N.W.2d 806 (N.D. 1996)
Naumann v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 545 N.W.2d 184 (N.D. 1996)
Nemec v. ND Workers Comp. , 543 N.W.2d 233 (N.D. 1996)
Berg Transport, Inc. v. ND Workers Comp. and Oller , 542 N.W.2d 729 (N.D. 1996)
Basin Electric Power Coop. v. ND Workers Comp., , 541 N.W.2d 685 (N.D. 1996)
Ollom v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 541 N.W.2d 455 (N.D. 1995)
S & S Landscaping v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 541 N.W.2d 80 (N.D. 1995)
Edwin Held v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 540 N.W.2d 166 (N.D. 1995)
Belgarde v. ND Workers Comp. , 544 N.W.2d 176 (N.D. 1995)
Johnson v. ND Workers Comp. , 539 N.W.2d 295 (N.D. 1995)
Schumacher v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 536 N.W.2d 355 (N.D. 1995)
Pederson v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 534 N.W.2d 809 (N.D. 1995)
Otto v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 533 N.W.2d 703 (N.D. 1995)
Fischer v. ND Workers Comp , 530 N.W.2d 344 (N.D. 1995)
Ollom v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 529 N.W.2d 876 (N.D. 1995)
Effertz v. ND Workers Comp. , 525 N.W.2d 691 (N.D. 1994)
Vail v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 522 N.W.2d 480 (N.D. 1994)
Spangler v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 519 N.W.2d 576 (N.D. 1994)
Haney v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 518 N.W.2d 195 (N.D. 1994)
State of ND, Workers Comp. Bureau v. Kostka Food Service , 516 N.W.2d 278 (N.D. 1994)
Tooley v. Alm , 515 N.W.2d 137 (N.D. 1994)
Halseth v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 514 N.W.2d 371 (N.D. 1994)
Rieniets v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 512 N.W.2d 708 (N.D. 1994)
Meyer v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 512 N.W.2d 680 (N.D. 1994)
Barnum v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 516 N.W.2d 300 (N.D. 1994)
Burrows v. ND Workers' Comp. , 510 N.W.2d 617 (N.D. 1994)
Rooks v. ND Workers' Comp. Bureau , 506 N.W.2d 78 (N.D. 1993)
Linnertz v. ND Workers' Comp. , 502 N.W.2d 528 (N.D. 1993)
Schiff v. ND Workers' Compensation Bureau , 503 N.W.2d 848 (N.D. 1993)
Wherry v. ND State Hospital , 498 N.W.2d 136 (N.D. 1993)
Little v. Tracy , 497 N.W.2d 700 (N.D. 1993)
Johnson v. ND Workers' Compensation Bureau , 496 N.W.2d 562 (N.D. 1993)
Schultz v. ND Workers' Compensation Bureau , 497 N.W.2d 101 (N.D. 1992)
Kuklok v. ND Workers' Comp. Bureau , 492 N.W.2d 572 (N.D. 1992)
Thompson v. ND Workers' Compensation Bureau , 490 N.W.2d 248 (N.D. 1992)
Grotte v. ND Workers' Comp. Bureau , 489 N.W.2d 875 (N.D. 1992)
Kackman v. ND Workers' Compensation Bureau , 488 N.W.2d 623 (N.D. 1992)
Johnson v. ND Workers' Compensation Bureau , 484 N.W.2d 292 (N.D. 1992)
Kallhoff v. ND Workers' Compensation Bureau , 484 N.W.2d 510 (N.D. 1992)
Schmidt v. ND Workers' Compensation Bureau , 483 N.W.2d 187 (N.D. 1992)
Cahoon v. ND Workers' Comp. Bureau , 482 N.W.2d 865 (N.D. 1992)
Matuska v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 482 N.W.2d 856 (N.D. 1992)
Rogers v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 482 N.W.2d 607 (N.D. 1992)
Roggenbuck v. ND Workers' Compensation Bureau , 481 N.W.2d 599 (N.D. 1992)
Latraille v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 481 N.W.2d 446 (N.D. 1992)
Effertz v Workers Comp. , 481 N.W.2d 218 (N.D. 1992)
Effertz v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 481 N.W.2d 223 (N.D. 1992)
Schiff v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 480 N.W.2d 733 (N.D. 1992)
Holtz v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 479 N.W.2d 469 (N.D. 1992)
Ekstrom v. ND Workers' Comp. Bureau , 478 N.W.2d 380 (N.D. 1991)
Emery v. ND Workers' Comp. Bureau , 477 N.W.2d 202 (N.D. 1991)
Eull v. ND Workers' Compensation Bureau , 475 N.W.2d 129 (N.D. 1991)
Stepanek v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 476 N.W.2d 1 (N.D. 1991)
Braun v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 472 N.W.2d 457 (N.D. 1991)
Pleinis v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 472 N.W.2d 459 (N.D. 1991)
Christianson v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 470 N.W.2d 613 (N.D. 1991)
Flermoen v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 470 N.W.2d 220 (N.D. 1991)
Diegel v. ND Workers' Compensation Bureau , 469 N.W.2d 151 (N.D. 1991)
Ehrmantraut v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 469 N.W.2d 557 (N.D. 1991)
Mattila v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 472 N.W.2d 760 (N.D. 1991)
Wendt v. ND Workers' Compensation Bureau , 467 N.W.2d 720 (N.D. 1991)
Kavadas v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 466 N.W.2d 839 (N.D. 1991)
Matter of the Claim of Griffin , 466 N.W.2d 148 (N.D. 1991)
F.O.E. Aerie 2337 a/k/a Eagle's Club v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 464 N.W.2d 197 (N.D. 1990)
Sloan v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 462 N.W.2d 638 (N.D. 1990)
Kopp v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 462 N.W.2d 132 (N.D. 1990)
Schaefer v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 462 N.W.2d 179 (N.D. 1990)
Jones v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 461 N.W.2d 273 (N.D. 1990)
Westman v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 459 N.W.2d 540 (N.D. 1990)
Perman v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 458 N.W.2d 484 (N.D. 1990)
Plante v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 455 N.W.2d 195 (N.D. 1990)
Holmgren v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 455 N.W.2d 200 (N.D. 1990)
Olson v. North Dakota Workers Compensation Bureau , 453 N.W.2d 606 (N.D. 1990)
DeChandt v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 452 N.W.2d 82 (N.D. 1990)
Darnell v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 450 N.W.2d 721 (N.D. 1990)
Hintz v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 450 N.W.2d 727 (N.D. 1990)
Schmalz v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 449 N.W.2d 817 (N.D. 1989)
LaVallie v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 449 N.W.2d 826 (N.D. 1989)
Risch v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 447 N.W.2d 308 (N.D. 1989)
Palenberg v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 449 N.W.2d 826 (N.D. 1989)
Hayden v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 447 N.W.2d 489 (N.D. 1989)
Forster v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 447 N.W.2d 501 (N.D. 1989)
Ehli v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 447 N.W.2d 313 (N.D. 1989)
Smith v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 447 N.W.2d 250 (N.D. 1989)
Mund v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 444 N.W.2d 706 (N.D. 1989)
Haull v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 442 N.W.2d 447 (N.D. 1989)
Block v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 442 N.W.2d 447 (N.D. 1989)
White v. North Dakota Workers Compensation Bureau , 441 N.W.2d 908 (N.D. 1989)
Fercho v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 440 N.W.2d 507 (N.D. 1989)
Elliott v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 435 N.W.2d 695 (N.D. 1989)
Kroeplin v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 434 N.W.2d 351 (N.D. 1989)
Froysland v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 432 N.W.2d 883 (N.D. 1988)
Murray v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau , 431 N.W.2d 651 (N.D. 1988)
Evjen v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 429 N.W.2d 418 (N.D. 1988)
Moses v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 429 N.W.2d 436 (N.D. 1988)
Howes v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 429 N.W.2d 730 (N.D. 1988)
Johnson v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 428 N.W.2d 514 (N.D. 1988)
Choukalos v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 427 N.W.2d 344 (N.D. 1988)
Ybabez v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 430 N.W.2d 63 (N.D. 1988)
Hayes v. ND Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 425 N.W.2d 356 (N.D. 1988)
Kroh v. ND Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 425 N.W.2d 899 (N.D. 1988)
Levey v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 425 N.W.2d 376 (N.D. 1988)
Olson v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 419 N.W.2d 894 (N.D. 1988)
Nohr v. ND Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 419 N.W.2d 545 (N.D. 1988)
Beckler v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau , 418 N.W.2d 770 (N.D. 1988)
Jepson v. ND Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 417 N.W.2d 184 (N.D. 1987)
Kroeplin v. ND Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 415 N.W.2d 807 (N.D. 1987)
Lass v. ND Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 415 N.W.2d 796 (N.D. 1987)
Cody v. ND Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 413 N.W.2d 316 (N.D. 1987)
Boyko v. ND Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 409 N.W.2d 638 (N.D. 1987)
Lawson v. ND Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 409 N.W.2d 344 (N.D. 1987)
Waith v. ND Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 409 N.W.2d 94 (N.D. 1987)
Hamilton v. ND Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 408 N.W.2d 742 (N.D. 1987)
Syverson v. ND Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 406 N.W.2d 688 (N.D. 1987)
Wagy v. ND Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 403 N.W.2d 397 (N.D. 1987)
Eslinger v. N.D. Workmen's Comp. Bureau , 398 N.W.2d 741 (N.D. 1986)
Grace v. North Dakota Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 395 N.W.2d 576 (N.D. 1986)
Kelsh v. North Dakota Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 388 N.W.2d 870 (N.D. 1986)
State ex rel. Workmen's Compensation Bureau v. Clary , 389 N.W.2d 347 (N.D. 1986)
Blaskowski v. North Dakota Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 380 N.W.2d 333 (N.D. 1986)
Weber v. North Dakota Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 377 N.W.2d 571 (N.D. 1985)
Moore v. North Dakota Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 374 N.W.2d 71 (N.D. 1985)
Sunderland v. North Dakota Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 370 N.W.2d 549 (N.D. 1985)
Gregory v. North Dakota Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 369 N.W.2d 119 (N.D. 1985)
Ganske v. North Dakota Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 355 N.W.2d 800 (N.D. 1984)
Johnson v. North Dakota Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 344 N.W.2d 480 (N.D. 1984)
Manikowske v. North Dakota Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 338 N.W.2d 823 (N.D. 1983)
Schreder v. Cities Service Co. , 336 N.W.2d 641 (N.D. 1983)
Jones v. North Dakota Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 334 N.W.2d 188 (N.D. 1983)
Jimison v. North Dakota Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 331 N.W.2d 822 (N.D. 1983)
Bromley v. North Dakota Workmen's Comp. Fund , 330 N.W.2d 498 (N.D. 1983)
Satrom v. North Dakota Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 328 N.W.2d 824 (N.D. 1982)
Reynolds v. North Dakota Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 328 N.W.2d 247 (N.D. 1982)
Roberts v. North Dakota Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 326 N.W.2d 702 (N.D. 1982)
Roberts v. North Dakota Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 326 N.W.2d 201 (N.D. 1982)
Robert v. North Dakota Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 321 N.W.2d 501 (N.D. 1982)
Davis v. North Dakota Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 317 N.W.2d 820 (N.D. 1982)
Nelson v. North Dakota Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 316 N.W.2d 790 (N.D. 1982)
Ness v. St. Aloisius Hospital , 313 N.W.2d 781 (N.D. 1981)
Teegarden v. North Dakota Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 313 N.W.2d 716 (N.D. 1981)
Inglis v. North Dakota Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 312 N.W.2d 318 (N.D. 1981)
Kavonius v. North Dakota Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 306 N.W.2d 209 (N.D. 1981)
Bromley v. North Dakota Workmen's Comp. , 304 N.W.2d 412 (N.D. 1981)
Gramling v. North Dakota Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 303 N.W.2d 323 (N.D. 1981)
Shaughnessy v. Bohnet, d.b.a. Bohnet Grain & Cattle , 303 N.W.2d 337 (N.D. 1981)
Gernand v. Ost Services, Inc. , 298 N.W.2d 500 (N.D. 1980)
Balliet v. North Dakota Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 297 N.W.2d 791 (N.D. 1980)
Latendresse v. Preskey , 290 N.W.2d 267 (N.D. 1980)
Benson v. North Dakota Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 283 N.W.2d 96 (N.D. 1979)
Aus v. North Dakota Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 280 N.W.2d 911 (N.D. 1979)
U.S. Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. North Dakota Workmen's Comp. Bur. , 275 N.W.2d 618 (N.D. 1979)
Steele v. North Dakota Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 273 N.W.2d 692 (N.D. 1978)
Schlenk v. Aerial Contractors, Inc. , 268 N.W.2d 466 (N.D. 1978)
Wolf v. North Dakota Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 267 N.W.2d 785 (N.D. 1978)
Stout v. N.D. Workmen's Comp. Bureau , 253 N.W.2d 429 (N.D. 1977)
Benson v. North Dakota Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 250 N.W.2d 249 (N.D. 1977)
Stine v. Weiner , 238 N.W.2d 918 (N.D. 1976)
Stout v. N.D. Workmen's Comp. Bureau , 236 N.W.2d 889 (N.D. 1975)
Morel v. N.D. Workmen's Comp. Bureau , 225 N.W.2d 584 (N.D. 1975)
Buechler v. N.D. Workmen's Comp. Bureau , 222 N.W.2d 858 (N.D. 1974)
Bekkedahl v. N.D. Workmen's Comp. Bureau , 222 N.W.2d 841 (N.D. 1974)
O'Brien v. N.D. Workmen's Comp. Bureau , 222 N.W.2d 379 (N.D. 1974)
Olheiser v. Annco, Inc. , 219 N.W.2d 116 (N.D. 1974)
Suedel v. Workmen's Comp. Bureau , 218 N.W.2d 164 (N.D. 1974)
Schan v. Howard Sober, Inc. , 216 N.W.2d 793 (N.D. 1974)
Boettner v. Twin City Construction Co. , 214 N.W.2d 635 (N.D. 1974)
Foss v. N.D. Workmen's Comp. Bureau , 214 N.W.2d 519 (N.D. 1974)
Ambroson v. N.D. Workmens Comp. Bureau , 210 N.W.2d 85 (N.D. 1973)
Kempel v. Streich , 196 N.W.2d 589 (N.D. 1972)
Thernes v. Meisner , 191 N.W.2d 253 (N.D. 1971)
Dunn v. N.D. Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 191 N.W.2d 181 (N.D. 1971)
Heddon v. Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 189 N.W.2d 634 (N.D. 1971)
Geo. E. Haggart, Inc. v. Workmen's Compensation Bureau , 171 N.W.2d 104 (N.D. 1969)
Brown v. N.D. Workmen's Comp. Bureau , 152 N.W.2d 799 (N.D. 1967)
Beck v. Workmen's Comp. Bureau , 141 N.W.2d 784 (N.D. 1966)
Writh v. Workmen's Comp. Bureau , 141 N.W.2d 790 (N.D. 1966)
Kuntz v. N.D. Workmen's Comp. Bureau , 139 N.W.2d 525 (N.D. 1966)
Bender v. N.D. Workmen's Comp. Bureau , 139 N.W.2d 150 (N.D. 1965)
Asplund v. N.D. Workmen's Comp. Bureau , 138 N.W.2d 793 (N.D. 1965)

Generated from Supreme Court Docket on 07/23/2008