Jump to content

Ask Your VA Claims Questions | Read Current Posts 
Read VA Disability Claims Articles
Search | View All Forums | Donate | Blogs | New Users | Rules 

  • tbirds-va-claims-struggle (1).png

  • 01-2024-stay-online-donate-banner.png

     

  • 0

Dock Williams, Plaintiff-appellant V. Robert Finch, Secretary Of Health. Education And Welfare

Rate this question


deltaj

Question

  • HadIt.com Elder

This was a U.S. Court of Appeals case, Fifth Circuit - 440 F.2d 613, decided March 17, 1971. Perhaps someone could put up a link to this case because it provides an interesting definition in 42 USC of substantital gainful employment. V.A. also uses this same term in some of its regulations. The case is found at www.cases.justia.com/us-court-of-appeals/F2/440/613/352580 This veteran's claim for Social Security was denied but on appeal he won.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Answers 4
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters For This Question

Popular Days

Top Posters For This Question

4 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

I went through dozens of CAVC cases but the name Dock Williams didn't appear for anything more recent than this older case.

This would be an old COVA case and if you need more info the CAVC might be able to help you get a copy of it.

I remember the olden days of getting COVA decisions-

I would call 1-202-501-5970 (I think that was the same number then) ,give them the Docket Number and name, promise to pay a few bucks upon receipt of the case and then they would fax it to me.

Boy the internet sure has changed- but I dont know if the CAVC has access on line anywhere to the older COVA cases.

I wonder if this case is referenced in any BVA decision or it in fact some of the specific legal points in this case have been altered by time.(and subsequent CAVC cases)

GRADUATE ! Nov 2nd 2007 American Military University !

When thousands of Americans faced annihilation in the 1800s Chief

Osceola's response to his people, the Seminoles, was

simply "They(the US Army)have guns, but so do we."

Sameo to us -They (VA) have 38 CFR ,38 USC, and M21-1- but so do we.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • HadIt.com Elder
I went through dozens of CAVC cases but the name Dock Williams didn't appear for anything more recent than this older case.

This would be an old COVA case and if you need more info the CAVC might be able to help you get a copy of it.

I remember the olden days of getting COVA decisions-

I would call 1-202-501-5970 (I think that was the same number then) ,give them the Docket Number and name, promise to pay a few bucks upon receipt of the case and then they would fax it to me.

Boy the internet sure has changed- but I dont know if the CAVC has access on line anywhere to the older COVA cases.

I wonder if this case is referenced in any BVA decision or it in fact some of the specific legal points in this case have been altered by time.(and subsequent CAVC cases)

I went to the website of the U.S. Court of Veterans Appeals and searched cases using the term Williams. One case that I found that was interesting, but unfavorable, was 06-2036 Clabon Jones v. James Peake. It had a subsequent denial that was upheld on appeal because the veteran failed to file a notice of disagreement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • HadIt.com Elder
I went through dozens of CAVC cases but the name Dock Williams didn't appear for anything more recent than this older case.

This would be an old COVA case and if you need more info the CAVC might be able to help you get a copy of it.

I remember the olden days of getting COVA decisions-

I would call 1-202-501-5970 (I think that was the same number then) ,give them the Docket Number and name, promise to pay a few bucks upon receipt of the case and then they would fax it to me.

Boy the internet sure has changed- but I dont know if the CAVC has access on line anywhere to the older COVA cases.

I wonder if this case is referenced in any BVA decision or it in fact some of the specific legal points in this case have been altered by time.(and subsequent CAVC cases)

I went to the website of the U.S. Court of Veterans Appeals and searched cases using the term Williams. One case that I found that was interesting, but unfavorable, was 06-2036 Clabon Jones v. James Peake. It had a subsequent denial that was upheld on appeal because the veteran failed to file a notice of disagreement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Tell a friend

    Love HadIt.com’s VA Disability Community Vets helping Vets since 1997? Tell a friend!
  • Recent Achievements

    • spazbototto earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Paul Gretza earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Troy Spurlock went up a rank
      Community Regular
    • KMac1181 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • jERRYMCK earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Our picks

    • These decisions have made a big impact on how VA disability claims are handled, giving veterans more chances to get benefits and clearing up important issues.

      Service Connection

      Frost v. Shulkin (2017)
      This case established that for secondary service connection claims, the primary service-connected disability does not need to be service-connected or diagnosed at the time the secondary condition is incurred 1. This allows veterans to potentially receive secondary service connection for conditions that developed before their primary condition was officially service-connected. 

      Saunders v. Wilkie (2018)
      The Federal Circuit ruled that pain alone, without an accompanying diagnosed condition, can constitute a disability for VA compensation purposes if it results in functional impairment 1. This overturned previous precedent that required an underlying pathology for pain to be considered a disability.

      Effective Dates

      Martinez v. McDonough (2023)
      This case dealt with the denial of an earlier effective date for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) 2. It addressed issues around the validity of appeal withdrawals and the consideration of cognitive impairment in such decisions.

      Rating Issues

      Continue Reading on HadIt.com
      • 0 replies
    • I met with a VSO today at my VA Hospital who was very knowledgeable and very helpful.  We decided I should submit a few new claims which we did.  He told me that he didn't need copies of my military records that showed my sick call notations related to any of the claims.  He said that the VA now has entire military medical record on file and would find the record(s) in their own file.  It seemed odd to me as my service dates back to  1981 and spans 34 years through my retirement in 2015.  It sure seemed to make more sense for me to give him copies of my military medical record pages that document the injuries as I'd already had them with me.  He didn't want my copies.  Anyone have any information on this.  Much thanks in advance.  
      • 4 replies
    • Caluza Triangle defines what is necessary for service connection
      Caluza Triangle – Caluza vs Brown defined what is necessary for service connection. See COVA– CALUZA V. BROWN–TOTAL RECALL

      This has to be MEDICALLY Documented in your records:

      Current Diagnosis.   (No diagnosis, no Service Connection.)

      In-Service Event or Aggravation.
      Nexus (link- cause and effect- connection) or Doctor’s Statement close to: “The Veteran’s (current diagnosis) is at least as likely due to x Event in military service”
      • 0 replies
    • Do the sct codes help or hurt my disability rating 
    • VA has gotten away with (mis) interpreting their  ambigious, , vague regulations, then enforcing them willy nilly never in Veterans favor.  

      They justify all this to congress by calling themselves a "pro claimant Veteran friendly organization" who grants the benefit of the doubt to Veterans.  

      This is not true, 

      Proof:  

          About 80-90 percent of Veterans are initially denied by VA, pushing us into a massive backlog of appeals, or worse, sending impoverished Veterans "to the homeless streets" because  when they cant work, they can not keep their home.  I was one of those Veterans who they denied for a bogus reason:  "Its been too long since military service".  This is bogus because its not one of the criteria for service connection, but simply made up by VA.  And, I was a homeless Vet, albeit a short time,  mostly due to the kindness of strangers and friends. 

          Hadit would not be necessary if, indeed, VA gave Veterans the benefit of the doubt, and processed our claims efficiently and paid us promptly.  The VA is broken. 

          A huge percentage (nearly 100 percent) of Veterans who do get 100 percent, do so only after lengthy appeals.  I have answered questions for thousands of Veterans, and can only name ONE person who got their benefits correct on the first Regional Office decision.  All of the rest of us pretty much had lengthy frustrating appeals, mostly having to appeal multiple multiple times like I did. 

          I wish I know how VA gets away with lying to congress about how "VA is a claimant friendly system, where the Veteran is given the benefit of the doubt".   Then how come so many Veterans are homeless, and how come 22 Veterans take their life each day?  Va likes to blame the Veterans, not their system.   
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines and Terms of Use