# Verdon v. Brown

> United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · February 7, 1996 · 8 Vet. App. 529

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6612971

## Case

- **Full name:** Eddie W. VERDON v. Jesse BROWN, Secretary of Veterans Affairs
- **Court:** United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims
- **Decided:** February 7, 1996
- **Citations:** 8 Vet. App. 529; 1996 U.S. Vet. App. LEXIS 52; 1996 WL 47164
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurring in part by Holdaway
- **Judges:** Holdaway, Nebeker, Steinberg
- **Cited by:** 24 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6612971

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that when it is ambiguous whether a claim is withdrawn in a written letter, “it is not sufficient for the Board to conclude there was an abandonment without providing an adequate statement of reasons or bases to support that conclusion”

## Opinion text

HOLDAWAY, Judge,
concurring in part and dissenting in part:
I concur as to that part of the opinion concerning the claim for residuals of a bunio-nectomy. As to the right knee disability, the letter from the appellant to his representative agreeing to the 10% rating is clear and unequivocal. I find no ambiguity whatever in that letter; he abandoned any appeal he may have had as to a higher rating for his right knee disability. I would further opine that if a clear and unequivocal withdrawal is made by a claimant, and he is the one who, later, introduces “ambiguity” into the withdrawal, then he should bear the burden of establishing that the claim was not withdrawn.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6612971. Public record. Not legal advice.