Interesting Cue

[Berta]

from:http://www.va.gov/vetapp07/files3/0722335.txt

"ORDER

The July 1988 rating decision which denied the veteran's

request to reopen his previously denied claim of entitlement

to service connection for a right testicular disability on a

secondary basis was clearly and unmistakeably erroneous.

The CUE claim is granted."

There are 1151 CUE claims decided by the BVA for 2007- and they dont have all 2007 decisions posted yet-

certainly some of them have been granted.

This one might involve only a small rating- but almost 20 years of retro makes it a great outcome for this vet.

[carlie]

Berta,

Good post for those denied on reopen of claim, also great for caselaw.

Thanks,

carlie

[jbasser]

Not to mention that it clould also be a protected rating with the 20 year rule.

[carlie]

john,

VERY IMPORTANT POINT !!!!

[Ricky]

Berta - not to change the subject of this post - however, by reading the post a couple of times a veteran can gain ideals of how to argue a point with the board. Such ideals include those dreaded "do it in a jiffy rating decision" which is followed by a "speedy gonzales cut and pasted SOC". It won't give you an easy word for word argument but with a little creativity one can gain the knowledge from these post to effectively argue just about any point during a hearing.

As an example this one talks about a "rating decision that is brief and vague in the extereme". My point here is that we all know and try to transmit to a hearing officer that both the damn rating decision and SOC don't say crap. Now I know how to boardize the term etc.......

Just a thought.

Thanks for the research time you spend on items such as this.