Luther Riddell v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that if either Thun element is not met, then referral for extraschedular is not appropriate
• finding the issue reasonably raised because “the record contained] evidence of the collective impact of [the appellant’s] service-connected disabilities”
• finding the issue reasonably raised because \the record contain[ed] evidence of the collective impact of [the appellant's] service-connected disabilities\
• using the \loss of hypothetical employment advancement opportunities and an inability to work\ and \[e]vidence of a claimant's lost income\ as examples of \effects\ belonging to Thun step 2

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).