Ask Your VA Claims Questions | Read Current Posts
Read VA Disability Claims Articles
Search | View All Forums | Donate | Blogs | New Users | Rules
- 0
-
Tell a friend
-
Recent Achievements
-
Our picks
-
VA Disability Claims: 5 Game-Changing Precedential Decisions You Need to Know
Tbird posted a record in VA Claims and Benefits Information,
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
Picked By
Tbird, -
-
Are all military medical records on file at the VA?
RichardZ posted a topic in How to's on filing a Claim,
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
Picked By
RichardZ, -
-
Caluza Triangle defines what is necessary for service connection
Tbird posted a record in VA Claims and Benefits Information,
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
Picked By
Tbird, -
-
Post in ICD Codes and SCT CODES?WHAT THEY MEAN?
Timothy cawthorn posted an answer to a question,
Do the sct codes help or hurt my disability ratingPicked By
yellowrose, -
-
Post in Chevron Deference overruled by Supreme Court
broncovet posted a post in a topic,
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.Picked By
Lemuel, -
-
Question
Berta
"In Damrel v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 242, 246 (1994), the CAVC
held that the constructive notice rule first announced in
Bell was not applicable to decisions rendered prior to Bell
and held that where CAVC opinions formulate new
interpretations of the law subsequent to an RO decision,
those holdings cannot be the basis of a valid CUE claim.
Although the CAVC has recognized that a viable CUE claim may
be premised on the theory that the RO had failed to consider
evidence of a high probative value, the Court has made it
clear that, for such a claim to succeed as to an RO decision
issued prior to February 1990, the RO must have denied the
very existence of the evidence. See Glynn v. Brown, 6 Vet.
App. 523, 531 (1994) (CUE not found where prior decision "did
not deny the existence of an in-service injury" but denied
only that "any injury appellant may have sustained during
service did not aggravate his preexisting condition"); cf
Russell, 3 Vet. App. at 319 (RO's denial of existence of
evidence of record constitutes undebatable error).
According to VAOPGCPREC 12-95, if, subsequent to a final AOJ
denial prior to July 21, 1992, a claim is reopened and
benefits awarded, the AOJ's failure to consider evidence in
VA's possession, but not actually in the record before the
AOJ, may not form the basis for a finding of CUE. In that
instance, when a claim is subsequently reopened and benefits
are awarded, the effective date will be the date on which the
reopened claim was filed, per 38 USC 5110(a). Moreover, the
opinion notes that in VAOPGCPREC 12-94, GC had concluded
that, based on a United States Supreme Court holding,
precedential decisions of the Court of Veterans Appeals
generally do not apply retroactively to cases which have been
finally decided, but do apply to cases still open on direct
review. "
From : http://www.va.gov/vetapp04/files/0400460.txt
This is a fairly recent BVA decision-
I like this part :
"RO's denial of existence of
evidence of record constitutes undebatable error".
I have letters stated that VA denied the existence of some of Rod's records-
it may have no bearing on my claims at all-
This is my point- if the VA says that "the veterans SMRs were lost in the St Louis Fire" and then the veteran via NARA gets those SMRs themselves-(this has happened to 2 vets I helped and to some vets here)
therefore hasn't the VA comitted a CUE , as an undebatable error, by 'denying the existence of evidence?'
Did anything come along since Russell, 3 vet app, to overrule that statement in this BVA decision?
Thanks all---
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
Top Posters For This Question
2
1
Popular Days
Jun 15
5
Top Posters For This Question
Hoppy 2 posts
Berta 1 post
Popular Days
Jun 15 2006
5 posts
4 answers to this question
Recommended Posts