Horvath v. Ameron Intl. 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 “a breach of the duty to assist cannot constitute [clear and unmistakable error]”
• holding that, because Congress explicitly provided certain exceptions to the rule of finality, it did not intend to allow other exceptions
• holding that a breach of the duty to assist cannot form the predicate for a motion for revision of a finally decided claim based on clear and unmistakable error
• holding that “[t]he statutory scheme provides only two exceptions to the rule of finality” of VA decisions, a CUE claim and a claim to reopen based on new and material evidence
• holding that a breach of the duty to assist cannot form the predicate for a motion for revision of a finally decided claim based on clear and unmistakable error
• holding that grave procedural errors are not an exception to finality

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).