TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Crecco v. Nicholson

Richard J. CRECCO v. R. James NICHOLSON, Secretary of Veterans Affairs

Crecco v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 46 (Vet. App. 2007)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Federal Specialty Courts
Decided
March 6, 2007
Docket
No. 04-1174
Judges
Davis, Hagel, Kasold
Citations
21 Vet. App. 462007 U.S. Vet. App. LEXIS 3222007 WL 671059

Opinion of the Court — Per Curiam

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

ORDER PER CURIAM:

In a March 2, 2007, joint motion for remand, the parties propose that the Court vacate the May 28, 2004, Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) decision on appeal. They contend that the Board failed to address the appellant’s arguments that he was entitled to a disability rating for injuries to additional muscle groups than those for which he had been rated. The Court agrees, and the parties’ motion will be granted.

The Court expresses its appreciation to amicus curiae, American Legion, Military Order of the Purple Heart, National Veterans Legal Services Program, United Spinal Association, Veterans Law Group, Paralyzed Veterans of America, and Disabled American Veterans. The Court also extends its gratitude to attorneys Ronald B. Abrams, Margaret C. Bartley, Mark R. Lippman, Christopher J. Clay, Ralph A. Finizio, Michael P. Horan, and William S. Mailander for serving as amicus curiae in this matter and filing briefs with the Court.

On consideration of the foregoing, it is

ORDERED that the March 7, 2007, oral argument scheduled before the Court is cancelled. It is further

ORDERED that the joint motion for remand is GRANTED. The May 28, 2004, Board decision is SET ASIDE and the matter is REMANDED for readjudication in accordance with the bases for remand included in the joint motion. On remand, Mr. Crecco is permitted to submit additional evidence and argument to support his claim. See Kay v. Principi 16 Vet.App. 529 (2002). Further, this order and the joint motion for remand will be included in Mr. Crecco’s claims file. See id.; see also Fletcher v. Derwinski 1 Vet.App. 394 (1991). Under Rule 41(b) of the Court’s Rules of Practice and Procedure, this order is the mandate of the Court.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 2

DepthCaseCited by
Fletcher v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 394 (Vet. App. 1991) 334
Kay v. Principi, 16 Vet. App. 529 (Vet. App. 2002) 207

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list