38 C.F.R. § 20.1102
Rule 1102. Harmless error
An error or defect in any decision by the Board of Veterans' Appeals which does not affect the merits of the issue or substantive rights of the appellant will be considered harmless and not a basis for vacating or reversing such decision.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16
cases, 2010–2019 · leading case: 06-34 517 (Board of Vet. App. 2016).
06-34 517 (Board of Vet. App. 2016). “In view of the foregoing, the Board finds that the Veteran was notified and aware of the evidence needed to substantiate his claims and the avenues through which he might obtain such evidence, and of the allocation of responsibilities between himself and VA in obtaining such…”
06-34 517 (Board of Vet. App. 2016). “In view of the foregoing, the Board finds that the Veteran was notified and aware of the evidence needed to substantiate his claims and the avenues through which he might obtain such evidence, and of the allocation of responsibilities between himself and VA in obtaining such…”
181105-847 (Board of Vet. App. 2019). “384 (1993); 38 C.F.R. § 20.1102 (harmless error); VAOPGCPREC 16-92.”
08-23 584 (Board of Vet. App. 2014). “In view of the foregoing, the Board finds that the Veteran was notified and aware of the evidence needed to substantiate his claims, as well as the avenues through which he might obtain such evidence, and of the allocation of responsibilities between himself and VA in obtaining…”
08-08 978 (Board of Vet. App. 2012). “38 C.F.R. § 20.1102 . See also Shinseki v.”
07-25 359 (Board of Vet. App. 2012). “In view of the foregoing, the Board finds that the Veteran was notified and aware of the evidence needed to substantiate his appellate claim, as well as the avenues through which he might obtain such evidence, and of the allocation of responsibilities between himself and VA in…”
10-09 853 (Board of Vet. App. 2014). “384 (1993); see also 38 C.F.R. § 20.1102 (harmless error). In view of the foregoing, the Board finds that the Appellant was notified and aware of the evidence needed to substantiate his claim and the avenues through which he might obtain such evidence, and of the allocation of…”
07-08 296 (Board of Vet. App. 2015). “In view of the foregoing, the Board finds that the Veteran was notified and aware of the evidence needed to substantiate his claim, as well as the avenues through which he might obtain such evidence, and of the allocation of responsibilities between himself and VA in obtaining…”
96-41 559 (Board of Vet. App. 2011). “In view of the foregoing, the Board finds that the Veteran was notified and aware of the evidence needed to substantiate his claim, as well as the avenues through which he might obtain such evidence, and of the allocation of responsibilities between himself and VA in obtaining…”
08-04 974 (Board of Vet. App. 2011). “In view of the foregoing, the Board finds that the appellant was notified and aware of the evidence needed to substantiate his claim, as well as the avenues through which he might obtain such evidence, and of the allocation of responsibilities between himself and VA in obtaining…”
12-30 576 (Board of Vet. App. 2015). “In view of the foregoing, the Board finds that the Veteran was notified and aware of the evidence needed to substantiate his claim decided herein, as well as the avenues through which he might obtain such evidence, and of the allocation of responsibilities between himself and VA…”
06-03 199 (Board of Vet. App. 2015). “In view of the foregoing, the Board finds that the appellant was notified and aware of the evidence needed to substantiate his claim, as well as the avenues through which he might obtain such evidence, and of the allocation of responsibilities between himself and VA in obtaining…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.