green
Positive treatment
0.8 score
Treatment trajectory · 1994 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1994
2010
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
McCarren v. Secretary of the Department of Health & Human Services
Compare Charette v. Secretary of Dep’t of HHS, 33 Fed.Cl. 488, 490 (1995) (“By the plain language of the statute, de novo review ... is not appropriate.”), and McClendon v. Secretary of Dep’t of HHS, 28 Fed.Cl. 1, 6 (1993) (stating that the court will not review questions of statutory interpretation due nomo, and will instead grant the special master substantial deference), aff'd, 41 F.3d 1521 (Fed.Cir.1994), and Sharpnack v. Secretary of Dep’t of HHS, 27 Fed.Cl. 457, 459 (1993) (finding de novo review to be “contrary to the language of the statute”), aff'd, 17 F.3d 1442 (Fed.Cir…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In Re Michael J. Anstey and David F. Brown
94-1267.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
Nov 18, 1994.
Published
41 F.3d 1521
NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision of the Court rendered in a nonprecedential opinion or order.
In re Michael J. ANSTEY and David F. Brown.
No. 94-1267.
United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.
Nov. 18, 1994.
Before NIES, NEWMAN, and SCHALL, Circuit Judges:
Judgment
PER CURIAM.
1
AFFIRMED. See Fed.Cir.R. 36.