Legal Opinion
Zo v. Brown
United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims
Decided March 30, 1993No. 93-250PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM DECISION
STEINBERG, Associate Judge:
The pro se appellant veteran appeals from a 1991 decision of the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (BVA or Board) denying service connection for a back disorder. Summary disposition is appropriate here because the case is one “of relative simplicity” and the outcome is controlled by the Court’s precedents and is “not reasonably debatable”. Frankel v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 23, 25-26 (1990). Because the veteran has failed to submit new and material evidence to reopen his previously denied claim, the Court will affirm the Board’s decision. Pursuant to Rules…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Gilbert v. DerwinskiUnited States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · 1990
- Colvin v. DerwinskiUnited States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · 1991
- Frankel v. DerwinskiUnited States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · 1990
- Manio v. DerwinskiUnited States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · 1991
- Masors v. DerwinskiUnited States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · 1992
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Barrett v. NicholsonCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2006
- Leroy S. Robinson, Jr. v. Robert A. McDonaldUnited States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · 2016
- Green v. BrownUnited States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · 1993
- Leroy S. Robinson, Jr. v. Robert A. McDonaldUnited States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · 2016