936 results for 'cat:"Due Process"'.
J. Toth grants the Secretary of Veterans Affair’s motion for reconsideration of the surviving spouse’s appeal of the board’s decision dismissing the veteran’s claim for a higher rating for a right knee condition. The opinion given “is principally a restatement of [an] earlier decision vacating the June 2020 Board decision, modified … to address matters raised in the Secretary’s reconsideration motion.” Vacated and remanded.
Court: Court Of Appeals For Veterans Claims, Judge: Toth, Filed On: May 23, 2023, Case #: 21-1411, Categories: Health Care, Veterans, due Process
J. Pietsch finds the Board of Veterans Appeals improperly denied the Air Force vet’s initial compensable disability rating for allergic rhinitis and service connection for sinusitis, headaches and diabetes. The decision didn’t provide a required general statement, failing to correctly identify evidence it did not consider in its decision. The general statement must accurately inform the claimant why evidence was not considered and of what options are available for having it considered. The board did not consider evidence submitted during the period between the original decision and the notice of disagreement, and provided a misleadingly inaccurate general statement informing the vet that it did not consider only evidence received after the 90 days following the notice. This prejudiced the veteran. Remanded.
Court: Court Of Appeals For Veterans Claims, Judge: Pietsch, Filed On: May 23, 2023, Case #: 20-6853, Categories: Health Care, Veterans, due Process
Per curiam, the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims grants the Secretary of Veterans Affair’s motion to dismiss the vet’s application for attorney fees brought under the Equal Access to Justice Act after his case was remanded for development. The veteran has not demonstrated an extraordinary circumstance prevented timely filing, so equitable tolling is not warranted.
Court: Court Of Appeals For Veterans Claims, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: May 23, 2023, Case #: 20-0945(E), Categories: Veterans, due Process, Attorney Fees
J. Zamora finds a lower court erred when it denied a motion by prosecutors to detain defendant prior to trial in a murder case. The lower court failed to adequately consider factors that justified pretrial detention, including defendant’s “dangerousness,” “extensive criminal history” and past “failures to appear.” Reversed.
Court: New Mexico Supreme Court, Judge: Zamora, Filed On: May 22, 2023, Case #: S-1-SC-39744, Categories: Murder, Bail, due Process
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free