Tax Appeal of Wasson-Bendon Partners v. Kamikawa

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that “there is no new and material evidence even if all the evidence submitted since” an earlier decision were to be considered
• holding that CUE claim could not be raised as to RO decision because service connection for psychiatric disability was subject of subsuming Board decision on direct appeal
• CUE claim could not be raised as to RO decision because service connection for psychiatric disability was subject of subsuming BVA decision
• CUE claim could not be raised as to RO decision because service connection for psychiatric disability was subject of subsuming BVA decision
• § 3.302 “establishes presumptions concerning mental unsoundness as a result of the act of suicide or a bona fide attempt that negate willful misconduct ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).