Gregor v. Rodman

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that Secretary’s discretionary decision about whether to extend the period for filing an NOD was reviewable because the regulatory requirement of “good cause” was a sufficiently manageable standard
• approving Board’s consideration of “all the evidence of record” for the year preceding the claim to ascertain whether disability increased in severity
• affirming BVA effective-date determination when all evidence of record did not make factually ascertainable an increase in severity of disability prior to date of claim for increase
• approving BVA’s consideration of “all the evidence of record” for the year preceding claim
• discussing Secretary's \ ‘sole discretion' \ under 38 C.F.R. § 3.109(b) (1993
• “[rjesolution of the question of whether the Board accurately determined the effective date requires the Court to decide whether the Board erred in its factfinding”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).