United States v. Richard

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that “[pjresumption favors the validity of official military acts,” including those of a military records correction board, absent evidence to the contrary
• noting that “[p]resumption favors the validity of official military acts,” including those of a military records correction board, absent evidence to the contrary
• noting that “[p]resumption favors the validity of official military acts,” including those of a military records correction board, absent evidence to the contrary
• noting that the Court of Claims “will not hold the denial of a hearing improper where plaintiff failed to show, based on the documentation supporting the application, that the [correction board] acted arbitrarily in denying the hearing”
• stating presumption that “the BCMR and military personnel ... performed their functions properly”
• “In addition, the statute empowering the [AFBCMR], and the applicable regulations, do not require applicants be given a hearing, leaving the matter to the [AFBCMR]’s discretion.” (footnote omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).