Crecco v. Nicholson

21 Vet. App. 46, 2007 U.S. Vet. App. LEXIS 322, 2007 WL 671059
CourtUnited States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims
DecidedMarch 6, 2007
DocketNo. 04-1174
StatusPublished

This text of 21 Vet. App. 46 (Crecco v. Nicholson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Crecco v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 46, 2007 U.S. Vet. App. LEXIS 322, 2007 WL 671059 (Cal. 2007).

Opinion

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.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Kay v. Principi
16 Vet. App. 529 (Veterans Claims, 2002)
Fletcher v. Derwinski
1 Vet. App. 394 (Veterans Claims, 1991)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
21 Vet. App. 46, 2007 U.S. Vet. App. LEXIS 322, 2007 WL 671059, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crecco-v-nicholson-cavc-2007.