Case law

David R. Gagne v. Robert A. McDonald

27 Vet. App. 397 · United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Oct 19, 2015

At oral argument, counsel for the appellant stated that he is not seeking to qualify this event as a stressor for purposes of establishing service connection for PTSD, and this event's qualification as a stressor is therefore … The Secretary is unable to establish that further efforts to obtain verification of the appellant's alleged stressors would be "futile." Id.

Norma Van Valkenburg v. Eric K. Shinseki

23 Vet. App. 113 · United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Jul 24, 2009

Van Valkenburg's claim was initially denied by a regional office on the basis that although her husband died in a VA hospital, his death was not service connected and thus, she did not qualify for DIC benefits under 38 U.S.C … It is in this context that we accept the Secretary's representation that any claim, sufficient to reflect an intent to apply for survivor's benefits, that is filed with SSA will suffice to establish the effective date for

Frederick C. Gazelle v. Robert A. McDonald

27 Vet. App. 461 · United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Feb 2, 2016

Subsections 1114(k) through (t) establish additional rates of compensation based on specific circumstances. 38 U.S.C. § 1114(k)-(t). … Thus, there are two criteria a veteran must satisfy to qualify for this benefit: The first criterion requires that the veteran have a service-connected disability rated as total; multiple disabilities may not be combined

James A. Nohr v. Robert A. McDonald

27 Vet. App. 124 · United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Oct 30, 2014

Nohr's claim, finding that the presumption of sound condition applied, but that the evidence clearly and unmistakably established that his dysthymic disorder preexisted and was not aggravated in service. … Nohr did not dispute the Board's determination that the evidence clearly and unmistakably established that his dysthymic disorder preexisted service.

In re the Fee Agreement of Cox

10 Vet. App. 361 · United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Aug 7, 1997

Indeed, the Court’s enabling legislation quite clearly contemplates the Court’s issuance of writs. … Section 5904(d) is clearly such a law.

Dennis M. Thun v. James B. Peake

22 Vet. App. 111 · United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Apr 23, 2008

Thun's argument that an inadequacy in the rating schedule can be established solely by showing an asserted gap between his income (including his VA benefits) and the income of similarly qualified workers in his field. … Thun's disability picture cannot be characterized as an exceptional case, so as to render the schedular evaluations inadequate, is not clearly erroneous. See Gilbert, supra.

Talley v. Brown

6 Vet. App. 72 · United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Dec 9, 1993

Furthermore, the Board determined that the greater weight of the evidence established that symptoms of MS first appeared in 1981, well over seven years after appellant’s separation from service. … BACKGROUND Appellant has qualifying military service from April 1966 through March 1968. R. at 19. In December 1981, Dr. Erlbautn, a private physician, diagnosed appellant with MS. R. at 49.

Ferraro v. Derwinski

1 Vet. App. 326 · United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Jun 24, 1991

As in Hatlestad , the Court, here, points out the need for the BVA to clearly and concisely discuss the interrelationship between the above-mentioned regulations and their applicability to appellant’s claim. … PENSION If VA determines that appellant does not qualify for total unemployability for compensation purposes, VA should evaluate appellant under Chapter 15 to determine whether or not he qualifies for pension based on non-service-connected

John McBurney v. Eric K. Shinseki

23 Vet. App. 136 · United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Sep 10, 2009

McBurney refers to as such are not clearly VA stipulations, agreements, or concessions. … McBurney urges this Court to carve a distinction between factual findings and stipulations such that stipulations are immune from Board review, he cites no precedent–nor can the Court discern any–that would allow the Court

Dyess v. Derwinski

1 Vet. App. 448 · United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Sep 5, 1991

accordance with the requirement in law that, if a veteran’s claim is established by a fair preponderance of the evidence, it will be granted.” … He maintains that the VA general surgeon, in stating that he was unable to relate the pes planus to the knee condition, did not opine that there was no connection; instead, he referred the veteran to a specialist more qualified

Laruan v. West

11 Vet. App. 80 · United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Feb 3, 1998

VA, and indeed this Court, are without authority to abrogate the statutory requirement of qualifying service. Duro, supra. Accordingly, the Court holds that to the extent that Mr. … It is not for protracted and delaying negotiation where the issue is clearly defined and further debate would be but a waste of time — ours and those concerned with our decisions.

Ford v. Gober

10 Vet. App. 531 · United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Nov 20, 1997

. § 1112 (establishing presumption of service incurrence for qualifying veterans with statutorily defined conditions that manifest within one year after service), stated: “The fact that the veteran’s service may have commenced … Presumption Argument Based on 38 U.S.C. § 1112 : The veteran also contends that 38 U.S.C. § 1112 establishes a presumption that his condition was incurred during a period of war because his schizophrenic reaction was manifest

Guerrieri v. Brown

4 Vet. App. 467 · United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Apr 7, 1993

Nevertheless, appellant’s service entrance examination report from January 1980 indicated normal psychiatric findings, and appellant was rated qualified for duty. … In its decision, the BVA concluded that the evidence submitted since the Board’s May 1987 decision does not provide a new factual basis which establishes entitlement to service connection.

Perry v. West

12 Vet. App. 365 · United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · May 4, 1999

No. 100-321,102 Stat. 485 (May 20, 1988), established a presumption of service connection for certain diseases in radiation-exposed veterans). R. at 111. … Meeks qualified for a compensable rating for his eye disorder on the day following his discharge in 1969. Id. at 288 .)

William E. Freeman v. Eric K. Shinseki

24 Vet. App. 404 · United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Apr 26, 2011

It also specifically provided for review of matters under 38 U.S.C. §§ 1975 and 1984, matters governed by chapter 37 of title 38, and matters covered by chapter 72 of title 38, which established this Court. 8 Section 7104 … While not necessary to our decision at this juncture, a property right of the veteran is clearly potentially affected by any payment from his benefits to a fiduciary.

Chisem v. Brown

4 Vet. App. 169 · United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Feb 9, 1993

At the time of induction, he was found to be physically and mentally qualified. While in service, he was treated for hemorrhoids, and had a hemorrhoidectomy on December 24, 1942. … Therefore, all of the evidence establishes under 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (d) that the veteran’s psychiatric disorder was incurred in service.

Andrew U.D. Straw v. Robert L. Wilkie

United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Jun 26, 2020

With the law established, the Court turns to the circumstances of this case. … As explained above, the Act's text clearly requires that a family member have "resided at Camp Lejeune" to be eligible for VA benefits.

Elkins v. Derwinski

2 Vet. App. 422 · United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · May 21, 1992

The failure of a veteran to qualify for release from liability under this subsection does not preclude relief from being granted under [section] [5302(b) (formerly § 3102)] of this title, if eligible thereunder. 38 U.S.C. … However, as we observed in Schaper , “it appears that the law and regulation establish three criteria all of which must be met in order to qualify for a retroactive release — namely, at the time of transfer, there must have

Florence Petite v. Denis McDonough

United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Dec 16, 2021

Clearly, Congress knew how to add a full-time student criterion to section 101(4); the fact that it did so in subsection (B)(i)(IV) but not subsection (A)(iii) of the same statute is compelling evidence that subsection (A … provision that does contain such a limitation is paragraph (c), which, by its very terms, applies only to a very narrow factual situation, a student becoming disabled, that occurs after CHAMPVA eligibility has already been established

Henry L. Gardner v. Erik K. Shinseki

22 Vet. App. 415 · United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Mar 13, 2009

Character of Discharge and Insanity Determinations "In order to qualify for VA benefits, a claimant . . . or the party upon whose service the claimant predicates the claim . . . [must be] a 'veteran.'" … The Court reviews the Board's factual decision in this regard under the "clearly erroneous" standard of review. 38 U.S.C. § 7261(a)(4); see Beck, supra; Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 49, 52-53 (1990).