Levi v. Makalei

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that court lacks authority to establish class action procedures because jurisdictional statute limits jurisdiction of court to the review of final BVA decisions
• holding that, when read together, DC 5003 and 38 C.F.R. § 4.59 entitle a veteran to a minimum 10% rating \where the arthritis is established by x-ray . . . even though there is no actual limitation of motion\
• A 10 percent rating is warranted when painful motion is non-compensable under the appropriate diagnostic code and arthritis is established by X-ray findings
• where RO and BVA had evaluated a claimant’s condition under the wrong DC, Court selected the correct code and directed Board to evaluate condition under that code
• “Section 4.71a[, DC 5003] first provides a rating for actual (as opposed to painful) limitation of motion under DC 5200, etc. Since [the claimant] has no actual limitation of motion, this provision does not apply.”
• degenerative arthritis initially diagnosed during service held service connected

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).