Larry D. Ervin v. Eric K. Shinseki

How courts have described this case

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

• applying amended regula tion to pending claim when Secretary’s express intent was clear
• applying amended regulation to pending claim when Secretary's express intent was clear
• “If [the Secretary] did expressly speak to the temporal reach of the regulation, then the Court should apply the regulation as indicated by the language of the regulation.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).