Sloan v. North Dakota Workforce Safety & Insurance
2011 ND 194
| N.D. | 2011Background
- Sloan sustained a compensable work injury in 1985 at a Beulah coal gasification plant.
- WSI awarded permanent impairment benefits and issued multiple orders over time.
- Effective April 1, 2009, WSI adopted N.D. Admin. Code § 92‑01‑02‑25(4) addressing pain impairment.
- WSI recalculated Sloan’s impairment to 38% whole body, combining eight percent pain with prior ratings, and awarded $8,464.50 in June 2009.
- Sloan sought rehearing; ALJ and district court upheld WSI’s rule-based assessment.
- Court’s review focused on whether WSI acted within statutory authority and without arbitrariness in promulgating the rule.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the pain-cap at nine percent conflicts with statute | Sloan argues §65‑05‑12.2(10) requires impairment based on actual pain percentage | WSI contends the statute authorizes rules to govern impairment, not a direct numeric pain percentage | No conflict; rule consistent with statutory framework |
| Whether WSI had authority to promulgate rules incorporating AMA Guides with modifications | Sloan contends rules exceed statutory authority | WSI properly exercised authority to adopt rules addressing areas not fully covered by AMA Guides | WSI authority valid; rules within statutory delegation |
| Whether WSI's rulemaking was arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable | Sloan asserts rational basis lacking; pain percentages were improvised | WSI staff consulted experts; rulemaking had rational basis | Promulgation not arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable |
| Whether the district court erred in denying attorney’s fees | Sloan seeks fees under N.D.C.C. § 28‑32‑50 | Since judgment affirmed, fees denied | Fees denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Johnson v. North Dakota Workforce Safety & Ins., 2010 ND 198 (ND 2010) (limited review of agency decisions; statutory interpretation is reviewable)
- Auck v. Workforce Safety & Ins., 2010 ND 126 (ND 2010) (deference to agency factual findings; questions of law reviewed de novo)
- Traynor v. North Dakota Workmen’s Comp. Bur., 1997 ND 128 (ND 1997) (arbitrary or capricious standard for rulemaking)
- Little v. Traynor, 1997 ND 128 (ND 1997) (limitations on agency rulemaking; arbitrariness review)
- Ryan v. North Dakota Department of Human Services, 2003 ND 196 (ND 2003) (statutory construction of related provisions; harmonization)
- Moore v. North Dakota Workmen’s Comp. Bur., 374 N.W.2d 71 (ND 1985) (agency rules must align with statutes)
- Steele v. North Dakota Workmen’s Comp. Bur., 273 N.W.2d 692 (ND 1978) (early arbitrariness review in workers’ compensation)
- Shiek v. North Dakota Workers Comp. Bur., 2002 ND 85 (ND 2002) (statutory review of agency action; authority questions)
- In re Hubbard, 778 N.W.2d 313 (Minn. 2010) (perspective from another jurisdiction on impairment evaluation)