Margaret R. Russell v. Eric K. Shinseki, Opinion Number 10-3282, decided August 11, 2011 involved veteran’s motion to reconsider an order of dismissal that did not expressly incorporate the terms of the joint motion for remand.
The Court clarified that terms of a JMR are always enforceable by the Court even if the order dismissing the case does not expressly incorporate the terms of the JMR. The Court also clarified that a writ of mandamus is “an extraordinary remedy not to the granted when, inter alia, the veteran possesses adequate alternative means to obtain the desired relief, such as the ability to appeal a decision through the appeals process”. Id. at *2.
The purpose of this decision seems to be to reiterate the VA must follow the JMR even if the JMR is not expressly incorporated into the Court’s order. It also shows the power of a JMR and the need to carefully consider the VA’s proposed language.
Decided by Chief Judge Kasold, and Judges Hagel and Lance.
No comments:
Post a Comment