If the final action of the organization denies the right of the claimant to participate at all in
the fund on the ground that the injury was self-inflicted, or on the ground that the accident did
not arise in the course of employment, or upon any other ground going to the basis of the claim,
or if the organization allows the claimant to participate in the fund to a lesser degree than that
claimed by the claimant, if such allowance is less than the maximum allowance provided by this
title, the claimant may appeal to the district court of the county wherein the injury was inflicted or
of the county in which the claimant resides. An employer may also appeal a decision of the
organization in any injury case or an organization decision issued under chapter 65-04, in the
manner prescribed in this section. An appeal involving injuries allegedly covered by insurance
provided under contracts with extraterritorial coverage shall be triable in the district court of
Burleigh County. Any appeal under this section shall be taken in the manner provided in chapter
28-32. Any appeal to the district court shall be heard on the record, transmitted from the
organization, and, in the discretion of the court, additional evidence may be presented
pertaining to the questions of law involved in the appeal.
Notes of Decisions
Hayden v. North Dakota Workers Comp. Bureau, 447 N.W.2d 489 (N.D. 1989).
· cites it 24× “Section 65-10-01, N.D. C.C., provides that appeals from a decision of the Bureau must be made "to the district court of the county wherein the injury was inflicted or of the county in which the claimant resides.”
Johnson v. Elkin, 263 N.W.2d 123 (N.D. 1978).
· cites it 12× “1977), we said, in a case involving an appeal from a district court determination that the agricultural exclusion in the workmen's compensation law was unconstitutional, that: "Furthermore, while Section 65-10-01, NDCC, of the Workmen's Compensation Act provides for appeal to…”
Westman v. North Dakota Workers Comp. Bureau, 459 N.W.2d 540 (N.D. 1990).
· cites it 12× “The question presented by the motion to dismiss is whether NDCC § 65-10-01 is the exclusive source of a claimant’s right to appeal or whether that section must be read in conjunction with NDCC § 28-32-15.”
Roberts v. North Dakota Workmen's Comp. Bureau, 326 N.W.2d 702 (N.D. 1982).
· cites it 8× “See Section 65-10-01, N.D.C.C. Judge Christianson dissented in Burkhardt , although not specifically with regard to Section 65-10-02, noting that the adoption of the Administrative Agencies Practice Act wrought fundamental changes in the scope of review and the procedure on…”
Lass v. North Dakota Workmen's Comp. Bureau, 415 N.W.2d 796 (N.D. 1987).
· cites it 6× “A claimant may then appeal the Bureau’s decision on its review of the award in accordance with the provisions of §§ 65-10-01 and 28-32-15, N.D.C.C. After the Bureau’s order on that claim has become final, the claimant is always entitled to submit additional evidence and request…”
Tooley v. Alm, 515 N.W.2d 137 (N.D. 1994).
· cites it 4× “N.D.C.C. § 65-10-01; 28-32-15. There is nothing in this record to *143 indicate Tooley could not request, or the bureau would not issue, an order delineating his rights so any impairment issues raised by him in this case could be resolved in an appeal.”
Decker v. WSI, 2021 ND 117 (N.D. 2021).
· cites it 31× “WSI moved to dismiss Decker’s appeal, arguing the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the appeal was not filed in the proper county under N.D.C.C. § 65-10-01. [¶12] The district court granted WSI’s motion and dismissed Decker’s appeal.”
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.