State v. Kaohi

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that TDIU and schedu-lar-rating-increase claims are not necessarily intertwined and that TDIU rating claim there was “subsequent, separate, and distinct” from sehedular-rating-increase claim
• noting that TDIU claims focus on “ ‘subjective’ ” factors not considered by ratings schedule
• noting that TDIU claims focus on \'subjective'\ factors not considered by ratings schedule
• “[a] claim for TDIU presupposes that the rating for the condition is less than 100%”
• due to substantial evidence in support of, and “a lack of any evidence” against, appellant’s claim, Court reversed BVA denial of unemployability
• “claim for TDIU presupposes that the [schedular] rating for the condition is less than 100%”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).