How Do I Ask For A Full Court Review

[mos1833]

the court of appeals,made a panel decesion on my claim, denied

my lawyer is on vacation,or a long holiday. not much good any way.

they posted their judgment on 1-4-2013

i want to ask for a full court review-- what have i got to do ?

do i need new evidence ?

iam so confused and worried about the time limits for file ing.

thanks

[john999]

I think if you are going to go into federal court you need a lawyer to take you there. You may be able to file the paperwork to get on the docket, but you will need a lawyer. The CAVC would be child's play compared to federal court, but if you have a good lawyer and a good case you may win. It will end up back at the VA. Read Cushman 2008 at the CAVC site and you will see. He won at federal court, but it back on remand at the BVA. This has gone on for decades. I have been to CAVC twice once remanded back to BVA.

John

[deanbrt]

You need a new attorney to look things over.

[mos1833]

john999. this claim has already been to the federal court in 2004 it was sent back because of the duty to assist law.

that ended any assistance , or benefit of doubt ., the court wont address any of my arguments, they site the law , but wont say how they used it in my case, i want to get to federal court. but how do i ( or my lawyers ) get them produce the evidence they say they have.

docket no. at the court is 11-2847

my lawyers motion for reconidersation was pretty good, but still fell short,

what i wanted the record to show is that all the c/p examiners stated that they were swayed most by my separateing examination showing a normal back,and no complaints.

well sir that does not exist , if so many people have reviewed it, then they should be able to show it but they wont, iam sorry but they used that report against all my lay evidence, i just think it sucks.

thanks

[jbasser]

The court is gaining the reputation of passing the buck as issuing opinions and consistency with remands to the BVA. The BVA being the upper arm of the RO, often ignores Court remands and slaps claims in the black hole called the AMC where it sits until the next ice age starts. They pass it back and forth over time as the veteran gets older and sicker.

It is not fair to the veteran. That is for sure.

J

[john999]

I think only a lawyer can answer those questions. I have some of my own questions as well.

[broncovet]

You have been given good advice.

There are 3 levels of court review, reminding you the CAVC is a trier of law, not a trier of facts. The "facts" of the case is a determination made by the RO/BVA and the court is precluded from a conflicting factual determination. In other words, if the RO/BVA says your face is green, the CAVC will say that the facts establish your face is green. They wont look at your face and say, "it looks pink to me".

1. The first is a "single judge" CAVC decision. This happens for most non controversial cases. The judge decides and that is it. These decisions can award, deny or remand, but can not be cited as "precedential"

2. Sometimes, there is a "panel decision", that is 3 judges. Usually this is at least somewhat controversial opinion, and the powers that be feel a "panel" decision is warranted. These are precedential.

3. Finally, there is a "full court" or "en banc" decision. These are fairly rare, and, again the powers that be use an "en banc" decision to settle a very controversial point of law. En banc are always precedential, because the decision is a consensus of all the judges. Sometimes one or more judge can disagree, and they often cite their own "dissenting" opinion.

Your lawyer can ask for a panel or en banc decision, you dont want to even think of doing this pro se. If you dont like the lawyer, get another one.

En banc CAVC decisions can only be appealed in federal court, and, again only on errors of law not errors of factual determination.

Edited January 10, 2013 by broncovet