State v. Carson

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that an “assertion of nonreceipt, standing alone, does not rebut the presumption of regularity in VA’s mailing process”
• suggesting that 38 C.F.R. § 3.158(a) might refer to both documentary evidence and VA medical examinations
• noting well-established caselaw that an assertion of nonreceipt, standing alone, does not rebut the presumption of regular ity that VA properly mailed notice of its decision
• noting as “troubling” that the Secretary set forth in his brief to the Court the text of a 1949 regulation in support of his own position without also setting forth the text of another 1949 regulation that was “of potential benefit to the appellant”
• where NOD includes unadjudicated claim, Court has jurisdiction to remand matter of Board’s failure to adjudicate claim

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).