Veterans Claims· 12/5/2008

Michael T. Acciola v. James B. Peake

Citations

22 Vet. App. 320
2008 U.S. Vet. App. LEXIS 1483
2008 WL 5605826

How courts have described this case

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

holding that merely citing a general entitlement statute or regulation is insufficient to allege a specific CUE theory and explaining that to accept such broad pleadings would create a \pleading gimmick\ placing undue burden on the Secretary to invent CUE theories to adjudicate
\[I]f the pleading could encompass numerous theories [of CUE] . . . a CUE motion is properly dismissed without prejudice.\
Secretary conceding that even pleadings filed by a veteran’s representative are to be read sympathetically
Secretary conceding that even pleadings filed by a veteran's representative are to be read sympathetically
“[A] CUE theorfy] [is] more likely to be successful when the claimant ... clearly intends to raise it.”
“[I]f the pleading could encompass numerous theories [of CUE] ... a CUE motion is properly dismissed without prejudice.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Greene, Lance, Davis

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

13 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

24 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.