Kau v. City & County of Honolulu

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that where law is amended during pendency of appellant’s claim, most favorable version applies
• stating that the Board is not bound to accept medical opinions that are based upon an inaccurate factual background
• holding that the BVA was not required to accept the medical opinions of two doctors who rendered diagnoses of post-traumatic stress disorder almost twenty years after claimant’s separation from service and who relied on history as related by the appellant as the basis for those diagnoses
• finding Board is not bound to accept uncorroborated account of veteran’s medical history but must assess the credibility and weight of the evidence provided by the veteran rejecting it
• finding Board is not bound to accept uncorroborated account of veteran's medical history but must assess the credibility and weight of the evidence provided by the veteran rejecting it
• generally observing that a medical opinion premised upon an unsubstantiated account is of no probative value, and does not serve to verify the occurrences described

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).