Graham v. Keene Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the IJ improperly speculated “about the force of the beating, the medical implications of that force, and the appropriate treatment of various injuries”
• holding that the IJ’s speculation about the “force of the beating” and “the medical implications of that force” did not support adverse credibility finding
• noting that the IJ’s perception that petitioner had a suspiciously “flat affect” was subjective but still entitled to special deference
• requiring Agency to consider and address applicant’s explanation for identified discrepancies
• “Our cases caution against relying too heavily on inconsistencies that could be attributable to simple human error or reluctance.” (citing Shrestha, 590 F.3d at 1044–45)
• implausibility finding unsupported where agency “relied on speculation about the force of the beating, the medical implications of that force, and the appropriate treatment for various injuries.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).