State v. Wiborg

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the provisions of 38 C.F.R. § 3.105(a) and (d) do not apply when the claimant does not possess the requisite service because there is no legal entitlement to service connection
• holding that the provisions of 38 C.F.R. § 3.105(a) and (d) do not apply when the claimant does not possess the requisite service because there is no legal entitlement to service connection
• Board’s determination of well-groundedness is harmless error where claimant could not prevail as a matter of law based upon lack of legal entitlement to service
• defining evidence which may be used in such determinations

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).