Case law

Andrew J. Newman v. Eric K. Shinseki

23 Vet. App. 96 · United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Jun 11, 2009

See Landicho v. Brown, 7 Vet.App. 42, 54 (1994); see also Zevalkink v. Brown, 102 F.3d 1236, 1243-44 (Fed. Cir. 1996); Morton v. Gober, 14 Vet.App. 174 (2000) (per curiam order). Here, however, Mr. … Serra v. Nicholson, 19 Vet.App. 268, 272 (2005), citing McNaron v. Brown, 10 Vet.App. 61 (1997) (holding that a petitioner's death prior to the issuance of mandate constitutes an exceptional circumstance).

Mackie v. United States

172 Ct. Cl. 393 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 16, 1965

. §§2671, et seq. (1958), because (1) the subject injury was sustained incident to military service while on active duty [Feres v. United States, 340 U.S. 135 (1950); Buer v. … See Stone v. United States, 160 Ct. Cl. 128, 132 (1963).

Blount v. West

11 Vet. App. 32 · United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Jan 21, 1998

This Court is precluded by statute from including in the ROA any material that was not contained in the “record of proceedings before the Secretary and the Board.” 38 U.S.C. § 7252 (b); see Rogozinski v. … Simington v. Brown, 9 Vet.App. 334, 335 (1996) (per curiam order) (quoting Bell v. Derwinski, 2 Vet.App. 611, 612-13 (1992) (per curiam order)); see also Hulsey v.

Addington v. United States

94 Fed. Cl. 779 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Sep 28, 2010

Reynolds v. Army & Air Force Exch. Serv., 846 F.2d 746, 748 (Fed.Cir.1988) (citing Zunamon v. Brown, 418 F.2d 883, 886 (8th Cir.1969)). … The CAVC has exclusive jurisdiction to review' the decisions of the Board. 38 U.S.C. § 7252 (a); Davis v. United States, 36 Fed.Cl. 556, 559 (1996).

Norma Van Valkenburg v. Eric K. Shinseki

23 Vet. App. 113 · United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Jul 24, 2009

Allday v. Brown, 7 Vet.App. 517, 527 (1995); see also Washington v. Nicholson, 19 Vet.App. 362, 367-68 (2005) (Board must "assess the credibility of, and weight to be given to," lay testimony); Gutierrez v. … See Brown, 513 U.S. at 118 ("interpretive doubt is to be resolved in the veteran's favor"); Gardner v.

University of South Florida Board of Trustees v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 27, 2021

Brown, Senior Litigation Counsel, with whom were Brian M. Boynton, Acting Assistant Attorney General, and Gary L. … Judin v. United States, 110 F.3d 780, 784 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (citing Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp., 496 U.S. 384, 397-98 (1990)).

Lance Frederick Burgan v. Denis McDonough

United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Aug 23, 2024

Brown, 7 Vet.App. 298, 300-01 (1994) (applying the presumption of regularity to the Board's mailing of a copy of its decision to a veteran); Mindenhall v. … Brown, 5 Vet.App. 296, 298 (1993) (finding clear evidence to rebut the presumption of regularity where the Board mailed a decision to "244 Allen St., East Montevallo, AL 35115" instead of "244 Island St.

In re Neukirch

141 F.2d 503 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Mar 6, 1944

The Board of Appeals affirmed the decision of the examiner for the reasons given by him. Clearly, each of the references discloses a sealed flared coupling joint. … For the reasons stated the decision of the Board of Appeals is affirmed.

Jenkins v. United States

101 Fed. Cl. 122 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Sep 15, 2011

The agreement acknowledged that DDI could not pay Brown Printing on a current basis. … For a further discussion of the common law roots of this rule, see Cunningham v. Brown, 265 U.S. 1, 12-13 , 44 S.Ct. 424 , 68 L.Ed. 873 (1924); Schuyler v.

James B. Criswell v. R. James Nicholson

20 Vet. App. 501 · United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Dec 4, 2006

Criswell appeals through counsel a February 12, 2003, Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) decision in which the Board denied him an effective date prior to August 21, 1997, for the assignment of a 50% combined disability rating … See Butts v. Brown, 5 Vet.App. 532, 535 (1993) (en banc) (questions of fact are reviewed under the “clearly erroneous” standard set forth in 38 U.S.C. § 7261 (a)(4)). Mr.

11-07 645

Board of Veterans' Appeals · Jun 30, 2016

App. 268 (1998), where the Board's remand instructions were substantially complied with), aff'd, Dyment v. Principi, 287 F.3d 1377 (2002). … While the Board has considered this evidence in light of Martinak v. Nicholson, 21 Vet.

Roslyn Fuel Co. v. Commissioner

16 B.T.A. 285 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Apr 30, 1929

This includes the $26,235.27 paid for the Brown and Linn tracts. … Reviewed by the Board. Judgment will be entered under Rule 68 (e).

Gantt v. Principi

16 Vet. App. 89 · United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Apr 30, 2002

See 38 U.S.C. § 1541(a); Martin v. Brown, 7 Vet.App. 196, 199 (1994); 38 C.F.R. § 3.3(b)(4) (2001). … See 38 U.S.C. § 7104(d)(1); Allday v. Brown, 7 Vet.App. 517, 527 (1995); Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 49, 56-57 (1990). Here, the Board's statement of the reasons or bases does not address this critical issue.

Shawn P. Lacey v. Robert L. Wilkie

United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Aug 18, 2020

Vaughn v. Gober, 14 Vet.App. 92, 95 (2000) (citing Stillwell v. Brown, 6 Vet.App. 291, 301 (1994)). … The Secretary must establish that his position was substantially justified at both the Board level and before this Court. Id.; see Locher v. Brown, 9 Vet.App. 535, 537 (1996); ZP v.

Mesce v. United States

64 Ct. Cl. 481 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 16, 1928

In the most recent case on this subject, Metcalf & Eddy v. Mitchell, 269 U. … Co. v. Bond, 240 U. S. 449, 456 ; Standard Oil Co. v. Anderson, 212 U. S. 215, 227 ; and see Casement v. Brown, 148 U. S. 615 ; Singer Mfg. Co. v. Rahn, 132 U. S. 518, 523 .”

Emilio Estevez v. Denis McDonough

United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · May 19, 2023

Tropf v. Nicholson, 20 Vet.App. 317, 320 (2006) (quoting Brown v. Gardner, 513 U.S. 115, 120 (1994)). … Oral Argument at 57:20-58:15. 11 See, e.g., Brady v. Brown, 4 Vet.App. 203 (1993); Fanning v. Brown, 4 Vet.App. 225 (1993). Esteban v. Brown, 6 Vet.App. 259 (1994); Jones v. Principi, 18 Vet.

10-43 528

Board of Veterans' Appeals · Nov 30, 2016

Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004); see also Caluza v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 498 (1995). … See also Allen v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 439 (1995).; Hunt v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 292, 296 (1991).

Gene S. Groves v. Denis McDonough

United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Mar 25, 2021

Marciniak v. Brown, 10 Vet.App. 198, 201 (1997); see 38 U.S.C. § 7261(b)(2) (requiring the Court to "take due account of the rule of prejudicial error"); Shinseki v. … Cir. 2000) (table); Berger v. Brown, 10 Vet.App. 166, 169 (1997).

Mamerto D. Valiao v. Anthony J. Principi

17 Vet. App. 229 · United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Aug 15, 2003

See Sabonis v. Brown, 6 Vet.App. 426, 429 (1994) (stating that plain meaning of language of statute must be given effect unless it would lead to absurd result); see also Burris v. … Soyini v.

Lillie M. Wingard v. Eric K. Shinseki

26 Vet. App. 334 · United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Aug 16, 2013

Ass'n v. Bowen, 485 U.S. 399, 403-05 (1998))), aff'd sub nom. Gardner v. Brown, 5 F.3d 1456 (Fed. Cir. 1993), aff'd, 513 U.S. 115 (1994). … If "the plain meaning of a statute is discernable, that 'plain meaning must be given effect,'" Johnson v. Brown, 9 Vet.App. 369, 371 (1996) (quoting Tallman v.