N.D. Cent. Code » Chapter Title 28 Chapter 32
North Dakota Century Code

N.D. Cent. Code § 28-32-13 (2026)

Substantial compliance with rulemaking procedure

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ND-LEGndlegis.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A rule is invalid unless adopted in substantial compliance with this chapter. However, inadvertent failure to supply any person with a notice required by section 28-32-10 does not invalidate a rule. Notwithstanding subsection 2 of section 28-32-42, an action to contest the validity of a rule on the grounds of noncompliance with this chapter may not be commenced more than two years after the effective date of the rule.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 39 cases, 1966–2011 · leading case: Beckler v. North Dakota Workers Comp. Bureau, 418 N.W.2d 770 (N.D. 1988).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Beckler v. North Dakota Workers Comp. Bureau, 418 N.W.2d 770 (N.D. 1988). · cites it 8× “Any decision arrived at, as a result of an informal hearing, shall be made pursuant to North Dakota Century Code section 28-32-13." [Emphasis added.] NDAC XX-XX-XX-XX says: " Rehearing—Formal hearing.”
Geo. E. Haggart, Inc. v. North Dakota Workmen's Comp. Bureau, 171 N.W.2d 104 (N.D. 1969). · cites it 12× “In neither the resolution nor the affirmation of the resolution did the Bureau set forth separate findings of fact and conclusions of law upon which it based its decision, which it should have done, pursuant to § 28-32-13. The Bureau, before making the permanent disability…”
Lende v. North Dakota Workers' Comp. Bureau, 1997 ND 178 (N.D. 1997). · cites it 8× “Any party to any proceeding heard by an administrative agency, except in cases where the order of the administrative agency is declared final by any other statute, may appeal from the order within thirty days after notice of the order has been given as required by section…”
Evans v. Backes, 437 N.W.2d 848 (N.D. 1989). · cites it 8× “NDCC § 28-32-13. A finding of fact is necessary to dispose of a factual issue.”
State v. Sinner, 207 N.W.2d 495 (N.D. 1973). · cites it 14× “The petitioner also asserts that he did not receive proper notice of his license suspension, since the letter sent to him advising him of the suspension was not mailed to him by registered or certified mail as required by § 28-32-13, N.D.C.C. Section 28-32-13, N.D.C.C., provides…”
Saakian v. North Dakota Workers Comp. Bureau, 1998 ND 227 (N.D. 1998). · cites it 6× “See N.D.C.C. § 28-32-13. 2 . Contrary to Saakian's argument, the Bureau was not required to obtain an updated medical report addressing disability under N.”
Kraft v. North Dakota State Bd. of Nursing, 2001 ND 131 (N.D. 2001). · cites it 4× “[¶ 15] Adjudicative proceedings are governed by N.D.C.C. § 28-32-13, which provides: 1. In an adjudicative proceeding an administrative agency shall make and state concisely and explicitly its findings of fact and its separate conclusions of law, and the order of the agency…”
Walter v. North Dakota State High. Comm'r, 391 N.W.2d 155 (N.D. 1986). · cites it 8× “We note at the outset that the findings of fact and conclusions of law made by the hearing officer are quite sparse and thus are not examples to be followed for compliance with the Administrative Agencies Practice Act, Section 28-32-13, N.”
Steele v. North Dakota Workmen's Comp. Bureau, 273 N.W.2d 692 (N.D. 1978). · cites it 4× “This provision shall not be construed to relieve the commissioners of the workmen’s compensation bureau of the requirements of section 28-32-13 of this chapter [which requires the making of findings of fact, conclusions of law and decision].”
Sjostrand v. North Dakota Workers Comp. Bureau, 2002 ND 125 (N.D. 2002). · cites it 4× “1, or in the statute requiring administrative agencies to make findings of fact, see N.D.C.C. § 28-32-13. [4] Cf. Steadman, at 100 n.”
Aggie Investments GP v. Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 470 N.W.2d 805 (N.D. 1991). · cites it 4× “Aggie also contends that the PSC failed to make adequate findings of fact and a timely decision in violation of Section 28-32-13, N.D. C.C. Because of our resolution of this case, we need not consider the adequacy of any findings of fact or conclusions of law by the PSC in its…”
Singha v. North Dakota State Bd. of Med. Examiners, 1998 ND 42 (N.D. 1998). · cites it 4× “” There are no other findings or conclusions by the Board as required by N.D.C.C. § 28-32-13. See Evans, 437 N.W.2d at 850-51 (agency required to explicitly state findings of fact and conclusions of law to facilitate meaningful appellate review).”
Show all 39 citing cases →
— N.D. Cent. Code § 28-32-13(2) — 1 case
North Dakota Sec. Comm'r v. Juran & Moody, Inc., 2000 ND 136 (N.D. 2000).
— N.D. Cent. Code § 28-32-13(3) — 6 cases
Saakian v. North Dakota Workers Comp. Bureau, 1998 ND 227 (N.D. 1998). “See N.D.C.C. § 28-32-13. 2 . Contrary to Saakian's argument, the Bureau was not required to obtain an updated medical report addressing disability under N.”
Kraft v. North Dakota State Bd. of Nursing, 2001 ND 131 (N.D. 2001). “[¶ 15] Adjudicative proceedings are governed by N.D.C.C. § 28-32-13, which provides: 1. In an adjudicative proceeding an administrative agency shall make and state concisely and explicitly its findings of fact and its separate conclusions of law, and the order of the agency…”
Maginn v. North Dakota Workers Comp. Bureau, 550 N.W.2d 412 (N.D. 1996).
Scott v. North Dakota Workers Comp. Bureau, 1998 ND 221 (N.D. 1998).
Lamplighter Lounge v. State Ex Rel. Heitkamp, 510 N.W.2d 585 (N.D. 1994).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.