Ellis C. Smith, Claimant-Appellee v. R. James Nicholson, Secretary of Veterans Affairs

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a regulation is ambiguous where the language “still leaves the pertinent inquiry unresolved”
• holding that a regulation is ambiguous where the language \still leaves the pertinent inquiry unresolved\
• holding that 38 C.F.R. § 4.25(b), DC 6260, is ambiguous because its language \still leaves the pertinent inquiry unresolved\
• concluding that the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) erred in not deferring to VA's interpretation of its own regulations, 38 C.F.R. § 4.25(b
• holding that 38 C.F.R. § 4.25(b) and Diagnostic Code 6260 limits a veteran to a single disability rating for tinnitus, regardless whether the tinnitus is unilateral or bilateral
• stating that the Secretary's interpretation of his own regulations is \of controlling weight unless it is plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation\ (internal quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).