| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
jurisdiction |
independent decision-making |
|
Summary:
The BOR had the right to reject the evidence after weighing and assessing it, but it could not ignore it.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
errors in law |
excess of jurisdiction |
|
Summary:
Although an Umpire has the authority, when cancelling a BOR's decision, to give the decision that should have been given, he should do so only when the evidence in the file is sufficiently clear and not open to interpretation or subjective assessment.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
without regard for material |
|
Summary:
Although an Umpire has the authority, when cancelling a BOR's decision, to give the decision that should have been given, he should do so only when the evidence in the file is sufficiently clear and not open to interpretation or subjective assessment.
