Workforce Safety & Insurance v. Auck
North Dakota Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
CROTHERS, Justice.
[¶ 1] Cynthia Auck appeals the district court’s order finding Workforce Safety and Insurance (“WSI”) and Bobcat Company acted with substantial justification when refusing to pay death benefits to her, precluding an award of attorney fees under section 28-32-50, N.D.C.C. We affirm.
I
[¶ 2] This is the second time these parties are before this Court. The first time, WSI and Bobcat appealed the district court’s judgment affirming the Administrative Law Judge’s (“ALJ”) order reversing WSI’s denial of death benefits to Cynthia Auck, the surviving spouse of Richard Auck. We affirmed…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Scarborough v. PrincipiSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Gissel v. Kenmare TownshipNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1994
- Nelson v. North Dakota Workmen's Compensation BureauNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1982
- Rojas v. Workforce Safety & InsuranceNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2006
- Workforce Safety & Insurance v. AuckNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2010
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.