Legal Opinion
Rose v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided May 21, 1996No. 95-374CPublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
MOODY R. TIDWELL, III, Judge:
This case is before the court on defendant’s motion for judgment upon the record, filed pursuant to RCFC 56.1. At issue is whether an Army Physical Evaluation Board (“PEB”) acted in a manner that was arbitrary, capricious, contrary to law or regulation, or unsupported by substantial evidence when it determined that plaintiff was not entitled to disability pay because his heart condition had existed prior to, and was not aggravated by, his service. For the reasons set forth below, the court grants defendant’s motion.
FACTS
In 1979, after twenty years of service,…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- David W. Heisig v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1983
- Pamela Lea Maier v. Verne Orr, Secretary of the Air ForceCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1985
- Milton Hodosh and Richardson-Vicks, Inc. v. Block Drug Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1986
- Stephens v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1966
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Bernard v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2004
- Donald L. Wagner v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2004
- Banknote Corp. of America, Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2004
- Lechliter v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2006
- Delbert Wheeler Construction, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1997
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.