Should This Be Eed For Previously Won Dic Or Is It A Case Of Cue?

[Judy]

I hope starting a new topic is the correct thing to do.

I won very old SC DIC claim (I reopened in 2007), won in 2009, retro only to 2007.

I am working on getting EED (back to date of death, 1990).

I have a current Decision (denial) dated April 2012, and now must file BVA APPEAL (I-9).

I am working with Bash, he and I noticed the current VARO Decision lists part of the

EVIDENCE is:

""Copy of Board of Veterans Appeals Decision (BVA) pertaining to earlier effective date for ionizing radiation exposure disability (No relationship to this claim as this is not ionizing radiation claim) ""

I went back into my records to see where "ionizing radiation" was first mentioned (by them-I never used that term in my claim(s)) to find this in the BVA Decision dated 1994 (my original claim was 1990

and this was the BVA APPEAL to that ongoing claim). This is what I found in the 1994 BVA Denial:

""At the time this case was orinally before the Board in April 1992, it appeared that the appellant had presented a claim which was plausible and, therefore, "well-grounded" within the meaning of 38 U.S.C.A. $ 5107 (a) (West 1991). However, for reasons explained below, we are now of the opinion that the appellant has not submitted evidence of a well-grounded claim. ""

""In order for service connection for the cause of the veteran's death to be granted, it must be shown that a service-connected disorder caused the death or substantially or materially contributed to it.

A service - connected disorder is one which was incurred in or aggravated by service, or one which was proximately due to or the result of an established service-connected disability. During the veteran's lifetime, service connection had been established for nodular sclerosing Hodgkin's disease, which was rated as 100 percent disabling. According to his death certificate, the immediate cause of his death in August 1991 was arteriosclerotic heart disease. There were no other conditions contributing to death, and an autopsy was not conducted.""

........"" Arteriosclerotic heart disease is not recognized to be a potentially "radiogenic disease" under 38 U.S.C.A. $ 1112 © and 38 C.F.R. $ 3.309 (d). Consequently, the veteran's fatal arteriosclerotic heart disease may not be attributed to service radiation exposure, 38 C.F.R. $ 3.311b; see also Comboe v Principi No. 91-786 (U.S. Vet. App. January 1, 1993).""

......""Subsequent to the May 1992 remand, the United States Court of Veterans Appeals held that where the determinative issue in a claim involves medical causation or a medical diagnosis, competent medical evidence to the effect that the claim is plausible is required to establish that the claim is well grounded. Grottviet v Brown, U.S. Vet.App. 92-20 (May 5, 1993). Lay persons are not competent to offer opinions on medical causation. Espiritu v Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 492 (1992). If no competent medical evidence is submitted to support the claim, it is not well grounded. Tirpak v Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 609, 611 (1992). In light of this additional case law and the absense of competent medical evidence to support her claim, we must conclude that the appellant's claim is not well grounded. Accordingly, service connection for cause of the veteran's death is not in order.""

Now, my question.... Dr. Bash says "sounds like radiation error; should get EED".....

Can I possibly be awarded EED on this BVA APPEAL as it is related to my 2009 DIC award (retro to 2007) ??

OR

Is it necessary to open a NEW CUE claim in order to use this effectively (with IMO) to go for the EED?

Please can someone help me understand as I do not want to make a mistake here.

I am ready to file the I-9 and I read Berta's "verbage" on exactly how to word what I am "taking exception to".... VERY helpful!

Berta also suggested sending your exhibits (IMO too?) WITH the I-9 for them to have your evidence ......so it is very important

for me to KNOW if I should send all of this as it relates to my current claim for EED of the 2007 effective date of my DIC award.???

IF I need to use a CUE for this, then how would I respond to the current APPEAL?

Sorry to have written a book but I really need advice from you who really understand the law/regs etc., and you needed to know

all these pertinent facts to be clear on what is happening.

Just a word to explain my dilemma, I have had two SO's (AMVETS) and (TEXAS VETERANS COMMISSION) and neither one of

them want to assist or represent me anymore....can you believe it?

Thank you so much!

Judy B

( original case is in jurisdiction of Houston VARO)

[Judy]

I would not give up yet. You wont beleive how many times I read where claimants hung in there, even when the chips were down and won. Since about 2/3 of the cases at the BVA are remanded or awarded, only about a third are denied. That means you have a 66% 2 out of 3 in winning. Rememeber even the judge could see something Band M did not, for example there will be many new cases, and one of them may be like yours. I had 2 lawyers and one VSO tell me I didnt have a case and I pushed on and got my benefits.

While this is a good law firm, remember the lawyers can, and do, "skim the cream". That means they dont take cases they are not sure they can win, because they put a lot of money in representing a Vet.

You still have 3 choices:

1. Take it to another attorney, maybe he is "hungrier" or maybe he sees something B and M does not.

2. Have a VSO represent you.

3. Represent yourself.

As CC says, Never Give up!

It has been a while but I now have a lawyer who wants to represent me.... I also have discovered this: Prior to December 31 1992, if a veteran died AND was rated 100% disabled for "8 years prior to date of death"... then the original claim should have been granted (widow's SC DIC)....however in my case the original claim was denied (as a SC DIC) and the "8 year rule was ignored" in the original decision when I filed my original claim for SC DIC in 1990 and the 8 year rule continued to be ignored all the way through the BVA appeal and final denial of 1995.....

(The claim was re-opened in 2007 with a new IMO and we won SC DIC in 2009...).

Do I need an attorney to win this EED back to date of death (1990) since they finally awarded me SC DIC in 2009 (retro only to 2007--date of the re-opened claim)...... but the 8 year rule (which should have been applied ....was not mentioned or applied to the original claim....).

Is this considered a CUE?

Can anyone tell me the U.S.C. that applied to the 8 year rule (sorry I can't find my note where I wrote it down).

I am currently in the Appeal process with BVA after the denial of the EED for SC DIC (which I filed related to the 2009-2007 awarded SC DIC).

Thanks,

Judy

[Berta]

Judy , the 8 year criteria only involves enhanced DIC payments.

You stated:

“I also have discovered this: Prior to December 31 1992, if a veteran died AND was rated 100% disabled for "8 years prior to date of death"... then the original claim should have been granted (widow's SC DIC)....however in my case the original claim was denied ...”

This is not correct and I don't want anyone here to misunderstand this- SC TDIU P & T and/ or 100 P & T for a continuous ten year period preceding death warrants DIC.

But If a service connected death ,prior to December 31, 1992, is established , then the 8 year criteria (in most cases) will kick in for potential enhanced DIC.

Obviously, if any veteran who died prior to December 1992, with the 100% P & T SC or TDIU P & T SC in effect for ten continuous years prior to death, their survivor would have been eligible for DIC at the enhanced rate of payment.

If the veteran was rated at 100% P & T SC or TDIU P& T for only eight continuous years, and died prior to December 31, 1992, and the survivor succeeds in a DIC claim under any DIC basis, then the survivor's DIC check should include the enhanced additional DIC amount.

“Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1310, DIC benefits are payable to the surviving spouse of a veteran if the veteran died from a service-connected disability. 38 U.S.C.A. § 1310 (West 2002); 38 C.F.R. § 3.5(a) (2010). The amount of DIC payable shall be increased if at the time of the Veteran's death he was in receipt of or was entitled to receive compensation for a service-connected disability that was rated totally disabling for a continuous period of at least eight years immediately preceding his death. 38 U.S.C.A. § 1311(a)(2); 38 C.F.R. § 3.10©. Only periods in which the Veteran was married to the surviving spouse shall be considered in making that determination. 38 U.S.C.A. § 1311(a)(2); 38 C.F.R. § 3.10(f)(1). “

This enhanced benefit only applies to DIC amounts resulting from deaths prior to December 31, 1992, as in your case.

However, your award had a different EED and was not the date of your husband's death.The VA gave a rationale for picking that date in the DIC award.

It appeared to me from the prior posts here that you had raised the issue of potential 1151 death and/or 1318 10 year 100% P & T death and therefore you had to re-open for service connected death on a direct basis.

I stated here in a past post:

“I fully believe that a CUE might lie in the very first decision you received from VA ( from a VARO but then I think the denial was subsumed by the 1992 BVA decision so I cannot determine the date of which decision should be cued or where the CUE should be filed)

if the above regulations was not considered when you were first denied for a SC death. “

But I added this:

“But that depends on the way the original DIC SC death claim was stated.

In the multiple pasts posts here around 2008-2010 on the DIC claim, Delta also made the same point regarding the CUE issue as to the way the initial DIC claim was worded and supported with evidence. “

If your lawyer sees a CUE potential (he/she will pour over all past DIC decisions you got as well as the original 21-534 application, then it is possible that, if you can attain a better EED for DIC, then the enhanced DIC amount could possibly kick in, as your husband died prior to December 1992 and it appears he had a SC P & T for 8 years continuously prior to death. Your lawyer should definitely raise the 8 year 'enhanced DIC' issue if he/she can obtain an EED for DIC back to date of death.

The enhanced DIC regulation (not a DIC rule )only involves the amount of DIC payable,when SC death has been established :

In part:

1. 
   Section 1311(a)(2) increase. The basic monthly rate under paragraph (b) of this section shall be increased by the amount specified in 38 U.S.C. 1311(a)(2) if the veteran, at the time of death, was receiving, or was entitled to receive, compensation for service-connected disability that was rated by VA as totally disabling for a continuous period of at least eight years immediately preceding death. Determinations of entitlement to this increase shall be made in accordance with paragraph (f) of this section.
   
   (d) Alternative basic monthly rate for death occurring prior to January 1, 1993. The basic monthly rate of DIC for a surviving spouse when the death of the veteran occurred prior to January 1, 1993, will be the amount specified in 38 U.S.C. 1311(a)(3) corresponding to the veteran's pay grade in service, but only if such rate is greater than the total of the basic monthly rate and the section 1311(a)(2) increase (if applicable) the surviving spouse is entitled to receive under paragraphs (b) and © of this section. The Secretary of the concerned service department will certify the veteran's pay grade and the certification will be binding on VA. DIC paid pursuant to this paragraph may not be increased by the section 1311(a)(2) increase under paragraph © of this section.
   

From : http://cfr.vlex.com/vid/dependency-indemnity-surviving-spouse-19776113

[Berta]

Judy , the 8 year criteria only involves enhanced DIC payments.

You stated:

“I also have discovered this: Prior to December 31 1992, if a veteran died AND was rated 100% disabled for "8 years prior to date of death"... then the original claim should have been granted (widow's SC DIC)....however in my case the original claim was denied ...”

This is not correct and I don't want anyone here to misunderstand this- SC TDIU P & T and/ or 100 P & T for a continuous ten year period preceding death warrants DIC.

But If a service connected death ,prior to December 31, 1992, is established , then the 8 year criteria (in most cases) will kick in for potential enhanced DIC.

Obviously, if any veteran who died prior to December 1992, with the 100% P & T SC or TDIU P & T SC in effect for ten continuous years prior to death, their survivor would have been eligible for DIC at the enhanced rate of payment.

If the veteran was rated at 100% P & T SC or TDIU P& T for only eight continuous years, and died prior to December 31, 1992, and the survivor succeeds in a DIC claim under any DIC basis, then the survivor's DIC check should include the enhanced additional DIC amount.

“Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1310, DIC benefits are payable to the surviving spouse of a veteran if the veteran died from a service-connected disability. 38 U.S.C.A. § 1310 (West 2002); 38 C.F.R. § 3.5(a) (2010). The amount of DIC payable shall be increased if at the time of the Veteran's death he was in receipt of or was entitled to receive compensation for a service-connected disability that was rated totally disabling for a continuous period of at least eight years immediately preceding his death. 38 U.S.C.A. § 1311(a)(2); 38 C.F.R. § 3.10©. Only periods in which the Veteran was married to the surviving spouse shall be considered in making that determination. 38 U.S.C.A. § 1311(a)(2); 38 C.F.R. § 3.10(f)(1). “

This enhanced benefit only applies to DIC amounts resulting from deaths prior to December 31, 1992, as in your case.

However, your award had a different EED and was not the date of your husband's death.The VA gave a rationale for picking that date in the DIC award.

It appeared to me from the prior posts here that you had raised the issue of potential 1151 death and/or 1318 10 year 100% P & T death and therefore you had to re-open for service connected death on a direct basis.

I stated here in a past post:

“I fully believe that a CUE might lie in the very first decision you received from VA ( from a VARO but then I think the denial was subsumed by the 1992 BVA decision so I cannot determine the date of which decision should be cued or where the CUE should be filed)

if the above regulations was not considered when you were first denied for a SC death. “

But I added this:

“But that depends on the way the original DIC SC death claim was stated.

In the multiple pasts posts here around 2008-2010 on the DIC claim, Delta also made the same point regarding the CUE issue as to the way the initial DIC claim was worded and supported with evidence. “

If your lawyer sees a CUE potential (he/she will pour over all past DIC decisions you got as well as the original 21-534 application, then it is possible that, if you can attain a better EED for DIC, then the enhanced DIC amount could possibly kick in, as your husband died prior to December 1992 and it appears he had a SC P & T for 8 years continuously prior to death. Your lawyer should definitely raise the 8 year 'enhanced DIC' issue if he/she can obtain an EED for DIC back to date of death.

The enhanced DIC regulation (not a DIC rule )only involves the amount of DIC payable,when SC death has been established :

In part:

1. 
   Section 1311(a)(2) increase. The basic monthly rate under paragraph (b) of this section shall be increased by the amount specified in 38 U.S.C. 1311(a)(2) if the veteran, at the time of death, was receiving, or was entitled to receive, compensation for service-connected disability that was rated by VA as totally disabling for a continuous period of at least eight years immediately preceding death. Determinations of entitlement to this increase shall be made in accordance with paragraph (f) of this section.
   
   (d) Alternative basic monthly rate for death occurring prior to January 1, 1993. The basic monthly rate of DIC for a surviving spouse when the death of the veteran occurred prior to January 1, 1993, will be the amount specified in 38 U.S.C. 1311(a)(3) corresponding to the veteran's pay grade in service, but only if such rate is greater than the total of the basic monthly rate and the section 1311(a)(2) increase (if applicable) the surviving spouse is entitled to receive under paragraphs (b) and © of this section. The Secretary of the concerned service department will certify the veteran's pay grade and the certification will be binding on VA. DIC paid pursuant to this paragraph may not be increased by the section 1311(a)(2) increase under paragraph © of this section.
   

From : http://cfr.vlex.com/vid/dependency-indemnity-surviving-spouse-19776113

[Judy]

Thanks Berta; I understand what you are saying.

The attorney says there are multiple "issues" with the claim/case and they haven't decided (pending receipt of the veteran's C File) which avenue to pursue.

Needless to say, at this point, I don't know the answer to that either.

Thanks,

Judy

[Judy]

Hello Berta,

I am back. Not intending to beat a dead horse any more but I have been communicating with an attorney regarding my case and this is the opinion I get

back from her/him as recent as yesterday (9-24-2012).

The attorneys have determined this:

1) that I will never win the EED for the current SC DIC award as my current open case in the APPEAL status has no merit.

2) that I have a CUE claim and that it should be filed in reference (or against) the very first decision I ever received (from the RO)

back in 1990 which was a denial...saying the cause of death was not service-connected.

Without re-hashing my entire claim here (OMG..too much to even consider), I will suffice to say that the original 1990 DENIAL was

appealed, denied, went to BVA, was REMANDED to RO and again DENIED... all the way into 1994/1995. Then I dropped it.

The re-opened claim dated 2007 (with new evidence - IMO) was granted as SC DIC after all....but retro ONLY to date of the

re-opened claim (2007).

Now the attorney says I should CUE the ORIGINAL DENIAL at the RO LEVEL.... and this is what he wrote: (copied and pasted here):

"

Hi Judy,

I believe there was CUE in the original rating decison that denied benefits.

Where a veteran at the time of death either was "in receipt of" compensation or, in the alternative, was "entitled to receive" compensation, for service-connected disability continuously rated totally disabling for a period of not less than five years from the date of the veteran's discharge or release from active duty, eligible surviviors may receive benefits at DIC rates as if the veteran's death was service-connected.

The Statutory basis is from 38 U.S.C.S. Section 1318(b) and Section 1318(b)(2).

For veteran's totally disabled for a period of eight years, there is an increased rate for DIC under 38 U.S.C.S. Section 1311(a) (2).

That's it in a nutshell,

Best of luck,""

NEXT; a few days later attorney writes the following to me (after I questioned the accuracy of the above statement):

""Hi Judy,

The way I understand the rule is if the veteran were entitled to 100% rating for 5 years prior to death, the DIC is granted the surviving spouse. If the veteran were entitled to 100% for eight years prior to death the surviving spouse gets DIC too but at a slightly higher rate. See 38 USCS Section 1311(a)(2).

There is caselaw too: Hix v. West, 12 Vet.App. 138 (1999), aff'd sub nom. Hix v. Gober, 225 F,3d 1377 (Fed.Cir. 2000) (Court awarded increased amount for DIC where the veteran should have recieved a 100% rating for a period of eight years prior to his death.)

Hope this helps,""

THIS IS WHAT I BELIEVE HE IS REFERRING TO : 38 USC Section 1318(b)(2)

(2)the disability was continuously rated totally disabling for a period of not less than five years from the date of such veteran’s discharge or other release from active duty; or

Berta, you wrote a while back (here on hadit) this:

"stated here in a past post:

“I fully believe that a CUE might lie in the very first decision you received from VA ( from a VARO but then I think the denial was subsumed by the 1992 BVA decision so I cannot determine the date of which decision should be cued or where the CUE should be filed)

if the above regulations was not considered when you were first denied for a SC death. “

But I added this:

“But that depends on the way the original DIC SC death claim was stated.

Berta, I am not sure how to respond to this; my original SC DIC was the required form and I do not know what you mean by "how the claim was stated".

In the multiple pasts posts here around 2008-2010 on the DIC claim, Delta also made the same point regarding the CUE issue as to the way the initial DIC claim was worded and supported with evidence. “

If your lawyer sees a CUE potential (he/she will pour over all past DIC decisions you got as well as the original 21-534 application, then it is possible that, if you can attain a better EED for DIC, then the enhanced DIC amount could possibly kick in, as your husband died prior to December 1992 and it appears he had a SC P & T for 8 years continuously prior to death. Your lawyer should definitely raise the 8 year 'enhanced DIC' issue if he/she can obtain an EED for DIC back to date of death.

The enhanced DIC regulation (not a DIC rule )only involves the amount of DIC payable,when SC death has been established :

In part:

1. Section 1311(a)(2) increase. The basic monthly rate under paragraph (b) of this section shall be increased by the amount specified in 38 U.S.C. 1311(a)(2) if the veteran, at the time of death, was receiving, or was entitled to receive, compensation for service-connected disability that was rated by VA as totally disabling for a continuous period of at least eight years immediately preceding death. Determinations of entitlement to this increase shall be made in accordance with paragraph (f) of this section.
   
   (d) Alternative basic monthly rate for death occurring prior to January 1, 1993. The basic monthly rate of DIC for a surviving spouse when the death of the veteran occurred prior to January 1, 1993, will be the amount specified in 38 U.S.C. 1311(a)(3) corresponding to the veteran's pay grade in service, but only if such rate is greater than the total of the basic monthly rate and the section 1311(a)(2) increase (if applicable) the surviving spouse is entitled to receive under paragraphs (b) and © of this section. The Secretary of the concerned service department will certify the veteran's pay grade and the certification will be binding on VA. DIC paid pursuant to this paragraph may not be increased by the section 1311(a)(2) increase under paragraph © of this section."
   

From : http://cfr.vlex.com/...spouse-19776113"

IS THE ATTORNEY MISTAKEN in his INTERPRETATION OF THIS 8 year rule (I believe it applies ONLY to the ENHANCED PAY SCHEDULE and NOT THE LENGTH OF TIME THAT THE VETERAN

WAS RATED AT 100% prior to his date of death)? I read the reg to say "10 consecutive years prior to the date of death".

ALSO, he said it is much easier to win CUE when it is filed at the level of the RO DECISION as opposed to being filed at the level of the subsequent BVA DECISION. (?)

Do I even have a chance here to file a CUE and go at it from the standpoint of "hypothetical" entitlement? That is to say that the VA rated him 100% in (original disability date) 1969 and then lowered

the rating from 100% to 30% in 1971...(he did not appeal this reduction), then in the years from 1971 through 1982 (when again VA rated at 100%) he had numerous recurrences of the cancer for

which he had originally been rated 100%. It is my contention that this rating reduction was an error and should not have happened since he was CONTINOUSLY being treated for the SC disease during

all those years.

Does this give me any BASIS for HYPOTHETICAL (should have been receiving/entitled to receive) entitlement ...for the period of 10 years prior to date of death (1990)... He was 100% for 8 years and

2 months.... BUT NOT for a full 10 years.

Where do I go from here? Any advice is appreciated.... I am at my "layperson's end of wits" so to speak. The attorney tells me to file CUE on the original 1990 RO DENIAL of SC DIC (for EED of my award-back to date of death 1990) and yet I think his RATIONALE may be incorrect..i.e., the 8 year rule he cites is not a valid one (??)

Am I to give up at this point or where do I go from here.

Sorry this post is SO LONG... my apologies.

Judy

[Berta]

DIC under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1318

“Even when a Veteran's service connected disability did not

directly cause his death, VA will nevertheless pay DIC benefits

to the surviving spouse of a deceased Veteran who was in receipt

of, or entitled to receive compensation, at the time of his death

for a service-connected disability that was rated totally

disabling 1) if the disability was continuously rated totally

disabling for a period of 10 or more years immediately preceding

death; 2) if the disability was rated by the VA as totally

disabling continuously since the Veteran's release from active

duty and for at least 5 years immediately preceding death; or 3)

if the Veteran was a former prisoner of war who died after

September 30, 1999, and the disability was continuously rated

totally disabling for a period of not less than one year

immediately preceding death. 38 U.S.C.A. § 1318(b) (West 2002). “

This was part of a reply post I made in June to you.

The attorney is correct.

“But that depends on the way the original DIC SC death claim was stated. “

I believe both Delta and I were replyng in regards to the DIC EED.

“IS THE ATTORNEY MISTAKEN in his INTERPRETATION OF THIS 8 year rule (I believe it applies ONLY to the ENHANCED PAY SCHEDULE and NOT THE LENGTH OF TIME THAT THE VETERAN

WAS RATED AT 100% prior to his date of death)? I read the reg to say "10 consecutive years prior to the date of death".

Theattorney is not mistaken. The potential 8 year enhancement (higher level then the regular DIC amount) only applies to DIC that has been established already under the Ten Year rule.

“ALSO, he said it is much easier to win CUE when it is filed at the level of the RO DECISION as opposed to being filed at the level of the subsequent BVA DECISION. (?) “

That depends.It took me from 2004 to this past January 2012 to get my CUE claim awarded at the RO level.

It regarded a CUE in a 1998 decision from the Buffalo VARO

Your lawyer is right as to filing at the RO level,if the RO committed the CUE,,unless a prior RO decision was subsumed by a BVA decision. I believe that is what he means in the “ALSO quote”

He had benefit of all of your past decisions, I assume, so he would know best what denial the CUE should be filed on. And where it should be filed.

“Do I even have a chance here to file a CUE and go at it from the standpoint of "hypothetical" entitlement?”

Hypothetical entitlement:

Those regs changed years ago:

I would think the older regulations might apply to claims filed before the legislative changes to 1318.

Those claims have tradiditonally been VERY difficult to succeed in , as BVA decisions in the past reveal.and I dont see the basis here for that type of claim scenario.

I agree with your lawyer that the VA might have committed a CUE, and I think the CUE came from a VARO decision, but then again, that might have been subsumed by a subsequent BVA denial. I dont know. It depends on the dates of any denials and where thyey came from. Therefore the CUE would hve to be filed against the BVA.

Although the BVA decision site is down, at the left of the main BVA page, they give the criteria and regulations that control BVA CUEs.

I filed a BVA CUE once, decades ago but my claim was awarded at the RO level under a different basis, so that CUE didn't succeed. It was moot.

BVA CUE regulations are a little involved as to the legalize but still depend solely on the 3 facets ( 3 prongs of CUE,)

as explained in our CUE forum.

I think I posted my SMC CUE claim in the CUE forum and referenced the way I won it.

I have another potential CUE and will file it the same way ,as I explained my evidence, in the CUE forum.

It all rests on legal errors regarding established medical evidence.

This time I will handle it differently however.

It should have never taken 8 years to resolve.

That was only because the RO refused to read my legal evidence.

I do agree with your lawyer , that a VARO should be fully capable of properly deciding a CUE they made.

In my case, as with all of my past claims, my RO fought me aggressively ,even making up stuff in the regs, and even making stuff up abput my husband's claims.... to keep denying the 2004 CUE. It didnt work.

They held onto it instead of fulfilling a scheduled BVA transfer in 2010 because I think they were ashamed to have the BVA see what they did to deny me. Their denials were beyond being ridiculous.

The Nehmer VARO , when they awarded my IHD claim , then resolved the pending CUE claim quickly ,too.

It was really a piece of cake. The legal evidence I had fully warranted the award. Plain and simple prime facie CUE.

ALL CUE claims should be brief , sticking to the regulations they broke in the decision.

Our CUE forum here has extensive info on CUE. And some great successful CUE claim decisions Carlie posted ,from the BVA.

Edited September 26, 2012 by Berta