William E. McCreary v. R. James Nicholson

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that the Court incorporated the standards used by other courts when determining when equitable tolling based on extraordinary circumstances will be applied
• holding equitable tolling not warranted where appellant failed to produce evidence \directly attributing his untimely appeal to the hurricane\
• stating that “it is obvious that a hurricane is a type of extraordinary circumstance that is beyond the appellant’s control”
• noting that Rule 3(c) of this Court’s Rules only requires an NOA to contain the appellant’s name, address, telephone number, VA claims file number, a reasonable identification of the Board decision appealed, and an expressed intent to seek Court review of that decision
• reviewing facts not before the Board to determine whether equitable tolling was appropriate
• requiring an appellant to demonstrate that he exercised “ ‘due diligence’ in preserving his appellate rights, meaning that a reasonably diligent appellant, under the same circumstances, would not have filed his appeal”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).