North Dakota Administrative Code Title 100 - State Seed Arbitration Board
Legal Basis & Context
The State Seed Arbitration Board is created under the North Dakota Century Code (NDCC) Chapter 4.1‑54.
This Board resolves disputes in seed transactions among three kinds of parties: seed labelers, seed dealers, and seed customers.
The arbitration is nonbinding, meaning that the recommendation of the Board does not force compliance. Parties can still go to civil court afterward.
Structure & Organization (Title 100, Article 100‑01)
From Article 100‑01 (“General Administration”):
The Board has six members, designated under NDCC § 4.1‑54‑01. A quorum is four members.
The Board elects a chair annually from among its members.
Chairs preside over meetings and hearings; the Board is responsible for keeping accurate records of its meetings, hearings, and deliberations.
Procedures (Title 100, Article 100‑02, Seed Arbitration Process)
Article 100‑02 sets out the seed arbitration process. Although some parts of Article 100‑02 (such as “Duties of the Board”, “Report”, “Fees”) have been repealed, the arbitration process chapter remains instructive.
Definitions (e.g. “seed”, “dispute involving a seed transaction”) are aligned with NDCC Chapter 4.1‑53
Petition Procedure
A seed labeler, dealer or customer may file a petition/complaint with the Agriculture Commissioner to initiate arbitration
A filing fee is required (as provided in the rules) when submitting the petition.
The petitioner must serve a copy on all parties involved.
Content of Complaint
The complaint must include, among other things:
Factual information relevant to the dispute (dates, locations, planting rates, conditions, test results, etc.)
Information about how the seed failed (e.g. did not conform to labeling, warranty, or because of negligence)
A sample of the seed tag or label, or lot identification, as applicable.
Names and addresses of witnesses or persons with factual knowledge.
Damages claimed.
Answer
Each party against whom the complaint is directed has 20 days to file an answer after being served.
Arbitration Hearing
Once complaint, fee, and answer are in, the Commissioner forwards materials to the Board chair. The chair schedules hearing(s) to gather evidence.
The initial hearing must be within 60 days of receipt of the complaint (unless extended for good cause). Additional hearings may occur.
Recommendation
Within 30 days after final hearing, the Board issues a nonbinding recommendation to resolve the dispute.
Procedural/Evidentiary Rules
Normal rules of evidence or civil procedure do not apply to the seed arbitration hearings.
The Board must give notice to parties of hearing format and guidelines (at least 30 days before hearing).
Witnesses / Fees
The Board can call witnesses; fees for witnesses are shared equally by the parties if the board requests them. Parties bear their own costs of presenting their case.
If costs exceed the initial fee, additional fees may be required from parties.
Statutory Provisions (NDCC) that Interact with Title 100
Relevant sections include:
NDCC § 4.1‑54‑03: Requires the Seed Arbitration Board to adopt rules of operation and procedure for arbitration hearings. Includes formulas for expense reimbursement
NDCC § 4.1‑54‑04: A seed labeler, dealer, or customer may file a petition; the Agriculture Commissioner forwards it; Board holds hearing and issues recommendation.
NDCC § 4.1‑54‑02: Compensation of certain members of the Board (e.g. the chairman of seed division, etc.) for duties.
Case Law & Judicial Decisions
While there is less case law specifically citing Title 100 arbitration proceedings, there are older seed‐law cases in North Dakota that help illustrate principles relevant to disputes involving seed transactions. Two key cases:
Miller v. Klindworth, 98 N.W.2d 109 (N.D. 1959)
Plaintiffs bought seed labelled as a particular variety of wheat (“Selkirk”). It turned out to be mislabelled, so the crop was susceptible to disease (rust) and performed poorly.
The seller had a contract disclaimer, stating that it gave no warranty, express or implied, as to description, quality, productiveness, or any other matter of any seed sold.
The court held that, under certain conditions, a disclaimer might be valid. Particularly, if the vendor is an intermediate vendor who relied on labeling from previous stages, took reasonable precautions etc. However, also found that disclaimers cannot override statutory requirements if the law prohibits disclaimers.
Narveson v. Schmid, 46 N.W.2d 288 (N.D. 1951)
A plaintiff provided seed to a son to plant; he filed a lien on the seed. A dispute arose about payment. This is more about seed liens than arbitration. Useful for understanding obligations and expectations regarding seed provision.
These older cases are not about the State Seed Arbitration Board directly, but they help interpret seed law, warranty/disclaimer of seed description/quality, labeling, and remedies.
How It Operates in Practice; Strengths & Limitations
Strengths:
Provides a relatively streamlined, specialized forum to resolve seed disputes without going through full litigation.
Expertise: The Board’s focus is narrow — seed transactions — so its members are presumed to understand the science, agriculture, labeling and seed standards.
Cost effective: Compared to full court cases. Even though there’s a filing fee and potentially more costs, arbitration is meant to be less burdensome.
Timeliness: Statute requires hearing and recommendation in relatively short time frames.
Limitations:
Because the recommendation is nonbinding, if one party disagrees with the recommendation, they may still need to litigate in regular court. This can reduce the coercive power of the Board’s rulings.
Evidentiary rules are looser; parties may perceive less formality or even risk that evidence standards are lower. But that is by design.
Some procedural portions (e.g. duties of the Board, certain report or fee chapters) have been repealed, so the Code may require supplement or updated rules in areas.
Implications & How Case Law Relates to Arbitration Board
Case law like Miller v. Klindworth shows that even before the formal seed arbitration process, courts in ND have enforced seed labeling requirements, held vendors accountable for mislabeling, and addressed the validity of disclaimers. That’s relevant because:
If a dispute goes through arbitration and a recommendation is given, the law (and prior cases) clarify that certain warranties or statements on labels may have legal weight that cannot be disclaimed lightly or contrary to statute.
The arbitration board’s recommendation would take into account statutory constraints like those in NDCC chapter 4.1‑53 (seed law), which includes labeling requirements, seed quality standards, etc.
RELATED Blog
0 comments