New England Tank Industries, Inc. v. Commissioner

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that misapplication of the statutory nexus standard is a “legal error provid[ing] an . . . independently sufficient ground for vacatur”
• holding that petitioner did not adequately raise a CAT claim to the Board when his brief did not “include[] any argument regarding” the claim “or cite[] any relevant case law”
• noting that failure to exhaust a particular claim before the Board bars judicial review of that claim
• finding legal error based on a fact pattern and agency decisions nearly identical to those in Hernandez-Cartagena
• “[A]ppellants need not conjure any magic words to raise an issue before” the BIA, “but simply need to launch the appropriate argument.”
• “[A] persecutor’s motivation is a classic factual question reviewed for substantial evidence.” (internal quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).