Bowerman v. Lane County

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• remanding matter where Board found that evidence was not material in that it was not relevant to or probative of pertinent issue
• deeming claims abandoned where appellant did not address them in initial brief, but asserted them in reply brief
• deeming claims abandoned where appellant did not address them in initial brief, but asserted them in reply brief
• matters are \inextricably intertwined\ where action on one matter could have a \significant impact\ on the other
• after citing Landgraf, infra, holding Karnas rule not applicable to change in particular procedural statutory provision (relating to BVA’s deciding cases by single-judge memorandum decisions rather than by three-member panel opinions
• where Board had denied reopening, Court remanded question whether new and material evidence was presented to reopen previously and finally disallowed claim for BVA to readjudicate in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 3.156(a) and Hodge

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).