Skip to main content
· 3/1/2017

State v. Vandeberg

Citations

  • 284 Or. App. 190
  • 389 P.3d 1196
  • 2017 Ore. App. LEXIS 257

How courts have described this case

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

  • outlining procedures for Board to follow when considering an issue or evidence that was not considered by the AOJ in the case
  • calling for unified approach requiring advance notice to appellant before Board considers evidence or issue not considered by RO
  • identifying \the post-certification and post-transfer 90-day period\ as the time period relevant to § 20.1304
  • calling for unified approach requiring advance notice to appellant before Board considers evidence or issue not considered by RO
  • identifying \the post-certification and post-transfer 90-day period\ as the time period relevant to § 20.1304
  • discussing “new approach” for BVA consideration of evidence and issues not considered by AOJ, under which claimant could waive right to AOJ consideration, and discussing potential implications of such waiver

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Dehoog, Flynn, Sercombe

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced 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.