The statements made to petitioner by respondent's agent in response to petitioner's initial request for reconsideration of respondent's denial of accidental retirement, to the effect that there could be no reconsideration in the absence of new evidence, were not erroneous, and, even if erroneous, should not have been understood as permission to resubmit the claim any time in the future once new evidence became available, and could not have created a right to benefits to which...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
