Search for: "Wells v. US Administrator of Veterans Affairs" Results 1 - 20 of 154
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Aug 2014, 8:59 am by Ralph L. Jacobson
There is a little known area of the law, involving the VA’s claims for reimbursement from veterans after they have resolved third party accident claims, in which the VA’s practices could use some attention as well. [read post]
10 Apr 2019, 7:35 am by Cannabis Law Group
Drug Enforcement Administration bumped CBD from a Schedule I classification to the much lower Schedule V. [read post]
3 Apr 2015, 5:14 am by Kelly Phillips Erb
Fortunately, when it comes to veterans’ benefits, those paid under any law, regulation, or administrative practice administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) are completely excludable. [read post]
17 Aug 2016, 9:22 am by Law Offices of Jeffrey S. Glassman
Two years later, he had surgery on his right knee, and he was awarded disability benefits by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). [read post]
17 Mar 2022, 9:10 pm by The Regulatory Review
Department of Veterans Affairs partnered with SAMHSA to implement the Veterans Crisis Line. [read post]
20 Aug 2020, 8:47 am by karp
If you can afford to send them over you’d damn well better be able to afford to take care of them. [read post]
21 Jan 2020, 7:32 am by Jon L. Gelman
The bill also directs the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to conducts a study on the effects of medical marijuana on veterans in pain. [read post]
27 Mar 2019, 12:41 pm by Tate Brown
The US Supreme Court heard oral argument Wednesday in Kisor v. [read post]
9 Apr 2019, 5:03 am by Stephanie Zable
And on March 6, Huawei and its U.S. subsidiary sued the U.S. government and the secretaries of labor, health and human services, education, agriculture, veterans affairs, and the interior, as well as the administrator of the General Services Administration. [read post]
4 Dec 2022, 5:20 am by Bernard Bell
  The recognition of the government misconduct exception in the FOIA context is not sufficiently well-grounded in precedent to deter unsympathetic courts of appeal or the U.S. [read post]