"By deciding this case " 'without benefit of oral argument and full briefing, ... this Court runs a great risk of rendering erroneous or ill-advised decisions that may confuse [the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and the Court's bar]: there is no reason to believe that this Court is immune from making mistakes, particularly under these kinds of circumstances.' ” Allen v. Hardy, 478 U.S. 255, 261-62, 106 S.Ct. 2878, 92 L.Ed.2d 199 (1986) (Marshall and Stevens, JJ., dissenting) (quoting Harris v. Rivera, 454 U.S. 339, 349, 102 S.Ct. 460, 70 L.Ed.2d 530 (1981) (Marshall, J., dissenting))”
How later courts described this case
- "By deciding this case " 'without benefit of oral argument and full briefing, ... this Court runs a great risk of rendering erroneous or ill-advised decisions that may confuse [the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and the Court's bar]: there is no reason to believe that this Court is immune from making mistakes, particularly under these kinds of circumstances.' ” Allen v. Hardy, 478 U.S. 255, 261-62, 106 S.Ct. 2878, 92 L.Ed.2d 199 (1986) (Marshall and Stevens, JJ., dissenting) (quoting Harris v. Rivera, 454 U.S. 339, 349, 102 S.Ct. 460, 70 L.Ed.2d 530 (1981) (Marshall, J., dissenting))”
- "By deciding this case "'without benefit of oral argument and full briefing, . . . this Court runs a great risk of rendering erroneous or ill-advised decisions that may confuse [the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and the Court's bar]: there is no reason to believe that this Court is immune from making mistakes, particularly under these kinds of circumstances.'" Allen v. Hardy, 478 U.S. 255, 261-62 (1986) (Marshall and Stevens, JJ., dissenting) (quoting Harris v. Rivera, 454 U.S. 339, 349 (1981) (Marshall, J., dissenting))."
- dictum stating that fee agreements for representation in this Court are “reviewable by this Court alone for reasonableness”
- en banc order denying en banc review
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
KRAMER, Judge,
concurring:
I concur in the result only.