-35-
Commissioner, 429 F.2d at 1032. Rather than treating the
credibility determinations as established on that account, the
Court of Appeals prescribed the standard under which they are to
be reviewed. Thus, we conclude we are not barred in these cases
from rejecting credibility determinations recommended in the STJ
report under the “manifestly unreasonable” standard of review
described above.
VI. Structure of the Court’s Report
After comparing the recommended findings of fact and legal
conclusions in the STJ report with the entire record in these
cases, and taking into account the parties’ posttrial briefs and
objections and responses filed pursuant to new Rule 183(c), we
have determined to reject some of the recommended findings of
fact in the STJ report because they are manifestly unreasonable
and to supplement others because they are incomplete.
In constructing the Findings of Fact portions of this
report, we have included many findings of fact drawn directly
from the STJ report, and we have made additional findings of fact
where necessary. For clarity, the findings of fact drawn
directly from the STJ report appear in italics and are
accompanied by page references to the STJ report.19 Footnotes
19 Some reordering and minor additions and changes have
been inserted in the recommended findings of fact adopted from
the STJ report. These minor changes did not alter the substance
of the adopted findings of fact and are not otherwise noted in
(continued...)
Page: Previous 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011