Frith v. WSI

Annotate this Case

Court Description: A district court judgment affirming an administrative law judge's order, which affirmed WSI's order denying benefits to a claimant, is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(5).



IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA 2014 ND 116

Roger Frith, Appellant
v.
North Dakota Workforce Safety and Insurance, Appellee and DMI Industries, Inc., Respondent

No. 20130286

Appeal from the District Court of Cass County, East Central Judicial District, the Honorable Lisa K. Fair McEvers, Judge.
AFFIRMED.
Per Curiam.
Roger Frith, self-represented, 1453 University Drive North, Fargo, N.D. 58102, appellant.
Jacqueline Sue Anderson, P.O. Box 2626, Fargo, N.D. 58108-2626, for appellee.

Frith v. WSINo. 20130286

Per Curiam.

[¶1] Roger Frith appeals from a district court judgment affirming an administrative law judge's order, which affirmed Workforce Safety and Insurance's order denying his claim for benefits. On appeal, Frith raises numerous issues, including that he was denied a fair hearing of his injury claim because his employer, DMI Industries, Inc., reported false and misleading information and made false statements in connection with his claim; that DMI did not comply with workers compensation statutes by failing to produce the painter's name who sprayed paint that allegedly injured him; that DMI had exposed him to harmful, toxic, and dangerous air in its production facility; that WSI violated his right to a fair hearing when WSI relied on false and misleading air test reports in denying his claim; and that a reasonable person reasonably could conclude that Frith proved that he had a compensable injury. The district court judgment is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(5).

[¶2] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.
Carol Ronning Kapsner
Dale V. Sandstrom
Daniel J. Crothers
Cynthia M. Feland, D.J.

[¶3] The Honorable Cynthia Feland, D.J., sitting in place of McEvers, J., disqualified.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.