State of Iowa v. Justice Lee Hill

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that on a claim to reopen, the effective date cannot predate the application of the claim
• explaining that an agency may issue regulations to fill gaps left by Congress
• all rejecting the argument that the pro- veteran canon of construction overrides deference due to VA's reasonable interpretation of an ambiguous statute
• first quoting Contreras v. United States, 215 F.3d 1267, 1274 (Fed. Cir. 2000) and then quoting Disabled Am. Veterans v. Gober, 234 F.3d 682, 691 (Fed. Cir. 2000)
• “When considering the legislative context of these provisions, it is also worth noting that the DVA regulation has been in place for many years, without legislative overruling, and despite frequent legislation by Congress.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).