Thomas Pekular v. Gordon H. Mansfield

22 Vet. App. 7, 2007 U.S. Vet. App. LEXIS 1964, 2007 WL 4547584
United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims·Decided December 20, 2007·No. 05-2067·Published

Opinions

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

On October 31, 2007, the Court issued a panel decision in the above-captioned appeal, denying the appellant’s motion to substitute and vacating the appealed Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) decision. See Pekular v. Mansfield, 21 Vet.App. 495 (2007). Prior to the issuance of Pekular, three judges requested full-Court consideration. See Court’s Internal Operating Procedures ¶ V(b)(5).

Upon consideration of the foregoing, and there being no majority in favor of the request for full-Court consideration, it is

ORDERED that full-Court consideration is DENIED.

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

Thomas Pekular v. Gordon H. Mansfield, 22 Vet. App. 7, 2007 U.S. Vet. App. LEXIS 1964, 2007 WL 4547584 (Cal. 2007).

22 Vet. App. 7 (Thomas Pekular v. Gordon H. Mansfield) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Mitchell v. Overman
103 U.S. 62 (Supreme Court, 1881)
Bell v. Bell
181 U.S. 175 (Supreme Court, 1901)
Quon Quon Poy v. Johnson
273 U.S. 352 (Supreme Court, 1927)
McDonald v. Maxwell
274 U.S. 91 (Supreme Court, 1927)
Harris v. Commissioner
340 U.S. 106 (Supreme Court, 1950)
Padgett v. Nicholson
473 F.3d 1364 (Federal Circuit, 2007)
Mildred Nolan v. R. James Nicholson
20 Vet. App. 340 (Veterans Claims, 2006)
Vda de Landicho v. Brown
7 Vet. App. 42 (Veterans Claims, 1994)
Zevalkink v. Brown
102 F.3d 1236 (Federal Circuit, 1996)
Pekular v. Mansfield
21 Vet. App. 495 (Veterans Claims, 2007)