Source: https://veteranclaims.net/2009/03/21/cue-liberal-reading-chisem-v-principi-no-90-1540/
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 16:34:53+00:00

Document:
See Chisem v. Principi, __ Vet.App. __, __ , No. 90-1540, slip op. at 12 (U.S. Vet.App. Feb. 9, 1993) (requirement of liberal reading of all documents submitted prior to BVA decision extends to determining whether CUE claim was raised to BVA (citing Azurin v. Derwinski, 2 Vet.App. 489 (1992) (BVA must review all issues which are reasonably raised from a liberal reading of appellant’s substantive appeal ), and, where appellant raises CUE before BVA, BVA must review the issue).
William G. Smith was on the brief for appellant.
Jacqueline E. Monroe were on the pleadings for appellee.
Before NEBEKER, Chief Judge, and FARLEY and MANKIN, Associate Judges.
that decision, and issues this decision in its place.
a motion for remand. The Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 38 U.S.C.A.
prompt rating consistent with this opinion.
disability within the meaning of the law.
explaining that he needed new evidence to reopen his claim. Dr. Arthur P.
veteran with a medical examination for the first time on April 16, 1965.
education, but not to any intellectual impediment.
BVA 90-39702, at 6 (Nov. 19, 1990).
Secretary’s motion and requests that the Court reverse the BVA decision.
section 5108 and Manio v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 140, 145 (1991).
U.S.C. ù 7104(d)(1) (formerly ù 4004(d)(1)).
Motion of Appellee at 7.
593 (1991); Hanson v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 512 (1991); Willis v.
Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 66 (1991).
service, establishes that the disease was incurred in service.” 38 C.F.R.
States v. United States Gypsum Co., 333 U.S. 364, 395 (1948); Brannon v.
Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 314, 317 (1990); Spencer v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App.
in Gilbert, whether the BVA’s factual findings are clearly erroneous.
submitted to show treatment for a mental condition shortly after service.
indicated that the veteran suffered from a nervous condition in service.
evidence was not weighed with evidence submitted since the 1953 decision.
the veteran for neurogenic complaints at intervals from 1950 through 1953.
After a meticulous review of all the evidence of record, Dr.
authorities. Nothing could be further from the truth. Mr.
which were precipitated by his military service.
Previous HitChisemNext Hit, BVA 90-39702, at 5.
judgment.” Willis, 1 Vet.App. at 70 (citing Colvin v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.
of the veteran’s treating physicians.
principle to the medical conclusion of any examining psychiatrist.
expanded this principle to the opinions of treating physicians in general.
Sammarco v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 111, 112-13 (1991); Gilbert, 1 Vet.App.
that he has received by the VA, we cannot do this for several reasons.
review by this Court. 38 U.S.C.A. ù 7105; 38 C.F.R. ùù 3.104(a), 20.
Vet.App. 310, 314-15 (1992) (consolidated with Collins v. Principi, No.
jurisdiction to review it at this time.
liberal reading of the appellant’s substantive appeal.” Azurin v.
for this regulation appears at 38 U.S.C.A. ù 7105.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.

 v. 
 v.

 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.