# Angel Vazquez-Flores v. Eric K. Shinseki

> United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · October 22, 2010 · 24 Vet. App. 94

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9502625

## Case

- **Full name:** Angel VAZQUEZ-FLORES, Appellant, v. Eric K. SHINSEKI, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Appellee
- **Court:** United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims
- **Decided:** October 22, 2010
- **Citations:** 24 Vet. App. 94; 2010 U.S. Vet. App. LEXIS 1937; 2010 WL 4146124
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Hagel
- **Judges:** Kasold, Greene, Hagel
- **Cited by:** 23 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/9502625

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that, although failing to provide notice or providing defective notice of the evidence necessary to substantiate a claim would have a naturally prejudicial effect, other notice errors generally would not have such an effect
- noting that a lack of notice regarding "a key element needed to substantiate the claim" deprives the claimant of a meaningful opportunity to participate in the processing of her claim

## Opinion text

HAGEL, Judge,
concurring in the result:
Although I agree with the majority’s opinion in this appeal, I feel compelled to reiterate my disagreement with the majority’s conclusions in Vazquez-Flores I that an appellant’s postadjudicatory participation in the VA appellate process can alone render a section 5103(a) notice error nonprejudicial. Because the Federal Circuit did not address this issue in Vazquez-Flores II, 580 F.3d 1270 (Fed.Cir.2009), the Court’s majority opinion as to these issues stands undisturbed. Therefore, for the reasons stated in my concurrence in Vazquez-Flores I, see 22 Vet.App. 37, 51-57 (2008), I continue to respectfully disagree with the majority’s apparent minimization of the duty to notify.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9502625. Public record. Not legal advice.