 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Snyder v. North Dakota Workers Compensation Bureau2/20/2001
onstitutional rights, or its rules or procedure deprived the claimant of a fair hearing. Negaard-Cooley v. North Dakota Workers Comp. Bureau, 2000 ND 122, 7, 611 N.W.2d 898. We exercise restraint in determining whether the Bureau's findings of fact are supported by a preponderance of the evidence and do not make independent findings or substitute our judgment for that of the Bureau, but determine only whether a reasoning mind reasonably could have determined the findings were proven by the weight of the evidence from the entire record. Renault v. North Dakota Workers Comp. Bureau, 1999 ND 187, 16, 601 N.W.2d 580. Jacobson v. North Dakota Workers Comp. Bureau, 2000 ND 225, 7.
III.
[ ] The Bureau terminated Snyder's benefits because he made false statements about work activities and failed to report income from work. Snyder contends the Bureau was not entitled to seek return-to-work information from him. Section 65-05-08(3), N.D.C.C., requires individuals receiving disability or rehabilitation benefits to report to the Bureau:
Any employee who is eligible for, or receiving disability or rehabilitation benefits under this title shall report any wages earned, from part-time or full-time work from any source. If an employee fails to report wages earned, the employee shall refund to the bureau any disability or vocational rehabilitation benefits overpaid by the bureau for that time period. . . . If the employee willfully fails to report wages earned, the employee is subject to the penalties in section 65-05-33. An employee shall report whether the employee has performed work or received wages. The bureau periodically shall provide a form to all injured employees receiving disability or rehabilitation benefits which the injured employee must complete to retain eligibility for further disability or rehabilitation benefits, regardless of the date of injury or claim filing. . . . An injured employee who is receiving disability or vocational rehabilitation benefits must report any work activities to the bureau whether or not the injured employee receives any wages. . . . For purposes of this subsection, "work" does not include routine daily activities of self-care or family care, or routine maintenance of the home and yard, and "activities" does not include recreational gaming or passive investment endeavors. Snyder argues N.D.C.C. § 65-05-08, providing for monthly reports to the Bureau, is inapplicable to him because it was not in effect at the time of his work injury.
[ ] Unless otherwise provided, statutes in effect on the date of an injury govern workers compensation benefits. Wanstrom, 2000 ND 17, 7, 604 N.W.2d 860. Since 1919, what is now codified as N.D.C.C. § 65-05-04 has provided the Bureau may review a compensation award at any time and may end, diminish, or increase the compensation previously awarded. When the Bureau changed Snyder's status to permanent total disability, it advised Snyder he would receive total disability payments "as long as you remain totally disabled." Section 65-05-04, N.D.C.C., is a legislative recognition that a benefit recipient's status may change over time. Thus, the Bureau may appropriately investigate whether a recipient continues to be disabled. Section 65-05-08(3), N.D.C.C., is a legislative recognition that inquiring about a recipient's work activities is an appropriate part of such an investigation. Section 65-05-08(3), N.D.C.C., specifically provides a recipient of disability benefits must complete reporting forms "to retain eligibility for further disability or rehabilitation benefits . . . regardless of the date of injury or claim filing." We conclude Snyder's argument is without merit.
[ ] Snyder argues N.D.C.C.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 North Dakota Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|