Brite v. Texas

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that Board is entitled to deference in making determinations within its area of expertise
• holding res judicata not applicable where agency’s first decision left open possibility of reviewing matter again
• determining that res judicata did not apply where “[t]he 7 plain language of the order leaves open the possibility of reviewing the matter again and is, therefore, not a final agency determination.”
• affirming agency’s decision rejecting the petitioner’s request for costly computer equipment; “[although the computer system requested may enhance petitioner’s employability, petitioner has not shown that such a system is necessary for him to be employed”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).