Legal Opinion · Concurrence

George T. Richardson v. R. James Nicholson

United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims

Decided May 17, 2006No. 03-2100Published

1ConcurrenceKasold, Judge

I concur in the Court’s holding that Mr. Richardson’s assertion that the 1944 RO decision failed to construe his pleadings to raise a claim was properly brought as a request to revise that decision based on CUE and that this matter must be remanded in light of Andrews and for application of Roberson. I disagree with the majority’s discussion as to how the Board or RO should proceed on remand. I believe a finding on remand that the 1944 RO failed to construe Mr. Andrews’ pleadings to raise a claim would constitute CUE in that decision, with the manifestly changed outcome being the processing…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. James R. Cook, Claimant-Appellant v. Anthony J. Principi, Secretary of Veterans AffairsCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2003
  2. Howard F. Roberson, Claimant-Appellant v. Anthony J. Principi, Secretary of Veterans AffairsCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2001
  3. Ashley v. DerwinskiUnited States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · 1992
  4. Andrews, Jr. v. NicholsonCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2005
  5. Tablazon v. BrownUnited States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · 1995

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API