In re Maui Elec. Co.

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 separate rating may be granted only for a \distinct and separate\ disability; none of the symptomatology may be overlapping
• holding that separate ratings may be assigned if the symptomatology is not duplicative or overlapping
• noting that a veteran may not be compensated twice for the same symptoms
• stating that the critical element in permitting the assignment of several ratings under various diagnostic codes is that none of the symptomatology for any one of the conditions is duplicative or overlapping with the symptomatology of the other condition
• explaining that when considering whether separate evaluations are warranted, \[t]he critical element is that none of the symptomatology for any one of these . . . conditions is duplicative of or overlapping with the symptomatology of the other . . . conditions.\
• examining three scar DCs and concluding that separate evaluation under each of the DCs was available because \none of the three DCs in question provide[s] that a veteran may not be rated separately for the described conditions\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).