Karl Kazmierczak

[john999]

Karl is my lawyer. I retained him in December of 2007. He immediately requested my C-File. So far the VA has not even sent him a copy. They notified me that I have a DRO Hearing in St. Petersburg in July of this year, but did not even bother to notify him. Now he is asking me to send him my copy of my C-File. I will, of course, but it seems that the VA is doing their best to sort of cut him out of the process. He is going to be at my hearing and thinks it is a good thing. Since it is a CUE from 1973 I don't even know why he needs the file since all the information they made the bad decision on is from 1973 and I sent him all that stuff. Since the only information that is relevant to the CUE is the information on hand in 1973 why does he need the entire C-file? I bring it up with him but he insists he needs the whole file. At the end of May the VA notifies me I have a DRO in early July. They know I have a lawyer or I would not be getting the Hearing since I was already denied for the same claim via a DRO Review.

It does appear to me, beyond doubt, that once you retain a lawyer for your claim things change. Karl says that he believes the VA probably did not even read my NOD, and since I hired him they read it. Now that they know the case will be remanded back if it goes to the BVA they want to do the Hearing. There were glaring errors in original denial of my CUE along with another claim they adjudicated with the CUE where they did not even notify me of a C&P exam, but denied it saying I never showed up for the exam. On that basis alone it would be remanded. For us independent types it may seem strange to go to someone else to help with our claims, but having a lawyer changes the way the VA plays the game.

[Bluntly]

I know this post is old but I happen to run across this during my research. @john999 I also have Karl as my attorney and would love to hear about your experiences with the firm. I’m heading to the BVA for a hearing and retained him last year. So far communications are excellent and no problems there. Just like to hear any success stories and hope you got everything you deserved. Thanks for taking your time to reply if you can.

[broncovet]

Bluntly:  I PM'd Tbird about your post.  While I donk know this lawyer, the fact he has been around since 2008, or earler, obviously means he has significant esperience.  However, I did NOT see his name in the NOVA advocate directory.  Im not sure why.  You may ask him that.  Generally I recommend NOVA attorneys.  Im sure it costs money to be in NOVA, and maybe all of them dont want to pay it.  

[Bluntly]

@broncovet always appreciated and thanks as always. After continued denials I decided to not give up and just hired an attorney this time around. His take is 20% which I’m ok with especially if it gets me aid & attendance or even smc t.

[Lemuel]

I am where you guys are with an attorney.  But my file is bigger and more complex.  Pages removed that can be demonstrated as having been there by other pages.

There are very new rulings by the CAVC and CAFC that bode well for us both for SMC and EED and validity of VA medical reports which used to be unchallengeable even by the BVA, the fact finder. 

A decision on PCAFC awards has made VA medical reports challengeable in appeal to the BVA and provides a class action approval for PCAFC denials before 02/27/2024 which are now appealable to the BVA but were not because they were decided by the VAHA instead of the VABA and were considered unreviewable because the decisions were medical reports.

The best way to search for an attorney is subscribing to CAFC Decisions.  You will then know the attorney can take your case all the way up because he has taken cases up to the CAFC.  The attorney or firm does not have to win to be good.  They have to be qualified to go to the court to be good.  Second you will learn that the BVA is the only fact finder. 

You cannot dispute facts in appeal to the CAVC or the CAFC.  Going alone, as I have learned is not the best way.  But it has taught me to get the facts right at the BVA or keep making the BVA review it until the fact are as they are recorded in the medical records not as some RO or DRO stated them without backing up their statements with the actual medical document, instead of making a blanket total review statement while just copying a previous decision.

I have CCK at the BVA now.  If they win there, they will get 20% from the award.  If they have to take it up, the VA will have to pay the attorney fees.  That is a good pressure on the VA GC not to challenge a win at the BVA.  Besides losing face they lose the Secretary money.

My case may involve anyone with a TBI before 2008 for an EED.  And it may adversely or positively affect SMC-t paid at SMC-R2.  I have the requirements the VA GC argued were necessary for Mr. Haskell in Haskell v McDonough, 22-1018; now Laska v McDonough at the CAVC still undecided by the three-judge panel at the CAVC, which means the BVA will either wait the decision or decide on the arguments.  

Since I am priority because of age and because I am in remand from the CAVC prior to the SMC-t question, I am hoping the BVA will decide on the arguments and cause the VA GC the conflict of their argument about the qualifications of Haskell. 

Haskell was much more disabled than I am and died the day before the hearing that is recorded on YouTube thus his wife Ms. Laska substituting.  There is no possible decision on SMC that will not show unfairness between two different cases, especially on SMC-t because of the erratic presentation of TBI which the Congress was trying to recognize in their change of U S Code in 2015. 

Edited April 27 by Lemuel
correct error

[Lemuel]

On 5/24/2008 at 1:18 PM, john999 said:

Karl is my lawyer. I retained him in December of 2007. He immediately requested my C-File. So far the VA has not even sent him a copy. They notified me that I have a DRO Hearing in St. Petersburg in July of this year, but did not even bother to notify him. Now he is asking me to send him my copy of my C-File. I will, of course, but it seems that the VA is doing their best to sort of cut him out of the process. He is going to be at my hearing and thinks it is a good thing. Since it is a CUE from 1973 I don't even know why he needs the file since all the information they made the bad decision on is from 1973 and I sent him all that stuff. Since the only information that is relevant to the CUE is the information on hand in 1973 why does he need the entire C-file? I bring it up with him but he insists he needs the whole file. At the end of May the VA notifies me I have a DRO in early July. They know I have a lawyer or I would not be getting the Hearing since I was already denied for the same claim via a DRO Review.

 

It does appear to me, beyond doubt, that once you retain a lawyer for your claim things change. Karl says that he believes the VA probably did not even read my NOD, and since I hired him they read it. Now that they know the case will be remanded back if it goes to the BVA they want to do the Hearing. There were glaring errors in original denial of my CUE along with another claim they adjudicated with the CUE where they did not even notify me of a C&P exam, but denied it saying I never showed up for the exam. On that basis alone it would be remanded. For us independent types it may seem strange to go to someone else to help with our claims, but having a lawyer changes the way the VA plays the game.

I take it "remanded back" means the same as it meant for me.  You were at the CAVC and got a remand back to the BVA.  Did Karl pick up your case when you appealed to the CAVC or before you appealed to the CAVC.  

Between my 2017 CAVC filing and my 2022 filing, the RBAs were abridged by a government contractor cutting the duplication.  Mistakes were demonstrated as leaving out important documents and the CAVC has demanded complete RBAs even though mine is now over 12,000 pages.  But we have search engines that work on finding documents.  The courts and attorneys have better search of the documents than I have on my computer and I have Adobe Acrobat Pro.  It may be I just do not know how to use it for handwriting search.

My attorney in 2009 could never get a copy of my file because of I had a "sensitivity 7" which meant only a higher level VA Officer could release it and he just ignored her requests. Never found out for sure what the sensitivity 7 meant.

There is also a problem of getting a complete file.  The VAOIG found a 5 plus mile high stack of documents the VA has not yet scanned into the VA database.  For me that means my medical file from prior to the records all being entered into the database are not available and the missing records from the RBA, which your attorney is trying to get, cannot be replaced because they have not been scanned yet.

Could be the problem for both of our delays.  Searching for the handwritten medical documents files that have not been scanned into the data base.  We are like the veterans who had their files in the fire at the Documents Center prior to digital data base even being considered.  The burned paper is worse.  It is not recoverable.  Our paper files are somewhere.  Just need to be found and scanned.

Fortunately, my medical file did not get to the Documents Center until after the fire and the IPTR that did get there before the fire were not located where the fire was.  So, my primary records for my TBI became available belatedly from my first claim and are now in the file with a documented date when they were first obtained for me years after my first claim.

Now the problem is getting replacements from the paper file of documents removed from the C&P file before the C&P file was scanned.  Important medical documents like seizure clinic visits, back clinic visits, etc.

Is your delay the same as mine?

[Lemuel]

On 5/24/2008 at 1:31 PM, Testvet said:

I agree I am using a former JAG officer for my lawyer and things seem to be happening after languishing for the past 3 years, I just had a C&P the doc screwed up bad more than 14 mistakes that I caught, like your lawyer mine insisted the entire C File she found things they have ignored since the claim was filed back in 2002, so it seems is if they are now dotting the I and crossing the Ts more than they ever did with SOs handling the claims.

It appears to me that we are in a government contractor problem. 

Some of our paper records were not scanned from our medical files.  The Medical files were presumed to be complete in the C&P file and were not.  The courts have found prior decisions we not well grounded when veterans came up with valid copies that were not in the C&P files thus complete "RBAs" since the decision that they must be complete, are not possible until that 5 plus mile high pile of documents not scanned are scanned into the database.

The director of records management cannot find the files because tracking cannot deliver them or they were destroyed unlawfully.  

We may be waiting upon an investigation to be completed, a "what to do" solution is decided similar to the lost records in the Documents Center fire in the early 1970s.  Our claims involve paper documents and the decision on the fire documents should be relevant to us for missing documents that we can prove existed with documents in the file or our possession.