Newhouse v. Nicholson

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the Board is presumed to have considered all evidence presented in the record
• concluding that an appellant’s chal- lenge as to whether an error is prejudicial involves factual matters outside our jurisdiction
• holding that this Court may make factual findings in reviewing for prejudicial error
• holding that this Court may make factual findings in reviewing for prejudicial error
• stating that 38 U.S.C. § 7292(d)(2) “pre- vents us from reviewing Mr. Newhouse’s contentions re- garding actual prejudice”
• stating that 38 U.S.C. § 7292(d)(2) “prevents us from reviewing [the claimant’s] contentions regarding actual prejudice”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).