· 6/18/1999
State v. Joo Ho Wang
Citations
- 90 Haw. 441
- 978 P.2d 879
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that, with respect to an RO decision that has been subsumed by a BVA decision, “no claim of CUE under 38 C.F.R. § 3.105(a) exists as a matter of law”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Klein, Levinson, Moon, Nakayama, Ramil
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced 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.