Greff v. Yukimura

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 presumption of sound condition “attaches only where there has been an induction examination in which the later-complained-of disability was not detected” (citing Bagby v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 225, 227 (1991))
• holding that the presumption of sound condition \attaches only where there has been an induction examination in which the later-complained-of disability was not detected\ (citing Bagby v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 225, 227 (1991)
• holding that the presumption of sound condition \attaches only where there has been an induction examination in which the later-complained-of disability was not detected\ (citing Bagby v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 225, 227 (1991)
• indicating that the Court undertakes “an independent examination of whether the facts found by the [Board] satisfactorily rebut the presumption of sound condition”
• indicating that the Court undertakes \an independent examination of whether the facts found by the [Board] satisfactorily rebut the presumption of sound condition\
• noting that the presumption of soundness only attaches “where there has been an induction examination in which the later-complained-of-disability was not detected”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).