Laserfiche WebLink
Tatums' citizen complaint. OSM's azgument to the contrary does not present any extraordinary <br />circumstance that requires reconsideration -the azgument is simply and fundamentally wrong as a <br />matter of law, <br />OSM's alternative argument -that the Board erred in considering the state court decision <br />because it post-dates the Regional Director's decision -mistakenly equates the state court decision <br />with a new factual development and, in any event, exaggerates the role of the state court decision <br />in the Board's disposition of this case. In the first place, the state court decision is nothing more or <br />less than another forum's resolution of precisely the same factual controversy that confronted <br />Regional Director on informal review and this Board on appeal. The conflicting evidence and <br />opinion testimony presented in state court was, at bottom, the same evidence and opinion presented <br />to the Regional Director and, ultimately, to this Boazd. The state court resolved the common factual <br />issue decidedly and unequivocally in the Tatums' favor. The state court decision was not a new fact; <br />it was merely a more refined and neutral weighing of essentially the same evidence that the Regional <br />Director considered. The Boazd was perfectly justified in weighing the evidence as the state court <br />did, thus avoiding the awkward state of affairs that conflicting adjudications ofthe same factual issue <br />would pose, both generally and on judicial review. <br />The fact that the state court decision post-dates the Regional Director's informal review <br />decision does not warrant reconsideration and remand to the Regional Director. This is so because <br />the state court decision is not a new fact in and of itself but merely a different weighing of the same <br />evidence the Regional Director considered. Moreover, the Regional Director would hazdly be <br />justified in re-examining or refusing to defer to the state court decision if there were a remand. <br />Nonetheless, everything is OSM's petition for reconsideration indicates that the Regional Director <br />7 <br />