Legal Opinion
Raymond Gallegos, Claimant-Appellee v. Anthony J. Principi, Secretary of Veterans Affairs
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided March 15, 2002No. 01-7037PublishedCited by 40 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RADER, Circuit Judge.
The Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims determined that 88 C.F.R. § 20.201 (1998) — a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) regulation setting minimum requirements for a notice of disagreement (NOD) — was invalid because the regulation required that an NOD express a desire for review by the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board). After invalidating the regulation, the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims held that a letter submitted by Raymond Gallegos’s authorized representative to a regional office was a valid NOD even without any expression of a desire for review by the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- United States v. Mead Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2001
- Morton v. RuizSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Aguirre-AguirreSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- Garrett v. Hayre, Claimant-Appellant v. Togo D. West, Jr., Secretary of Veterans AffairsCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1999
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by40 opinions
- Information Technology & Applications Corporation v. United States, and Rs Information Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2003
- Dingess - Hartman v. NicholsonUnited States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · 2006
- Mauerhan v. PrincipiUnited States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · 2002
- Robert B. Liesegang, Sr., Roberto Sotelo, and Paul L. Fletcher v. Secretary of Veterans AffairsCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2002
- Stanley J. Palczewski v. R. James NicholsonUnited States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · 2007
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.