Mickelson v. North Dakota Workforce Safety & Insurance

[¶ 32] I concur in Parts IV and V. I respectfully dissent from Part III in which the majority reverses the ALJ’s decision based on what it concludes is an improper application of N.D.C.C. § 65-01-02(10)(b)(7). Majority opinion at ¶ 23. I would affirm because the ALJ correctly applied current law and because the ALJ reasonably could have found based on the evidence that Mickelson failed to prove a compensable injury.

[¶ 33] A “compensable injury” under workers’ compensation law is defined as follows:

“10. ‘Compensable injury’ means an injury by accident arising out of and in the course of…