My Lawyer Is Taking My Cue To Federal Court.

[john999]

My lawyer is taking my CUE that was denied by the COVA to federal court. I don't want to give up. I am going to fight until I can't fight anymore on these issues because it not only affects me, but affects possibly hundreds of thousands of older vets. To set a date and say that prior to 1990 you don't have due process and after 1990 you do is just arbitrary. All my evidence prior to 1990 means nothing, and does not even need to be listed much less considered. Where is the justice in this? All the claims filed by WWII, Korea and Vietnam vets who filed claims before 1990 don't have the same due process rights as vets who filed one day after the VA decided they needed to actually list all the probative evidence in a claim. If evidence is not listed then there is no way to prove it was considered or not considered. These rules of assumption are opposite any consideration of due process. In fact, in my cue the CAVC shot down each and every argument we brought up. I cannot believe that in a case where it is obvious that important facts were just excluded can just be disposed of like trash. All our arguments{ there were many} were either interpreted as " duty to assist", "untimely", "debatable" or some other non CUE argument.

John

[Berta]

I think it is GREAT too John!

I am sure Karl has poured over Cushman V Shinseki, which was a Federal District Court decision ,as to Due Process.

http://www.bva.va.gov/docs/VLR_VOL3/4-DeutschAndBurriesci-DueProcessInTheWakePages220-262.pdf

This article reveals the Pandora's box situation that Cushman was all about........

http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/veter3&div=7&id=&page=

A Pandora's box, in my opinion , is like opening a can of VA worms....that might also contain some valuable pearls for the claimant..

and
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2009/08/18/vets-win-landmark-decision-due-process-guaranteed-for-first-time/

And we had much discussion on Cushman here in 2009.

The Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution says:

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

The Fifth Amendment of the Constitution was ratified in December, 1791 so,in my opinion, it applies to all veteran's claims filed since the VA , and all of us here ,were 'born.'

Go get them.

Edited May 14, 2014 by Berta

[ArNG11]

Hang em John. Slam them against the wall, with hand cuffs on and vices on their lips. Slam them hard. Justice will be done. Good luck.

[Commander Bob]

My lawyer is taking my CUE that was denied by the COVA to federal court. I don't want to give up. I am going to fight until I can't fight anymore on these issues because it not only affects me, but affects possibly hundreds of thousands of older vets. To set a date and say that prior to 1990 you don't have due process and after 1990 you do is just arbitrary. All my evidence prior to 1990 means nothing, and does not even need to be listed much less considered. Where is the justice in this? All the claims filed by WWII, Korea and Vietnam vets who filed claims before 1990 don't have the same due process rights as vets who filed one day after the VA decided they needed to actually list all the probative evidence in a claim. If evidence is not listed then there is no way to prove it was considered or not considered. These rules of assumption are opposite any consideration of due process. In fact, in my cue the CAVC shot down each and every argument we brought up. I cannot believe that in a case where it is obvious that important facts were just excluded can just be disposed of like trash. All our arguments{ there were many} were either interpreted as " duty to assist", "untimely", "debatable" or some other non CUE argument.

John

Inspiring.

Thanks & Best wishes,

Bob

[stillhere]

John, This great and I personally would like to thank you and your lawyer for continuing the fight!

I have just sent my BVA appeal and I am basing it on the fact the VA in 1984 picked a chose what evidence they wanted to use and balance of the evidence.

In just a snippet from my case the VA relied in my exit exam but did not acknowledge any of the doctors note which stated I had hearing loss moderate to severe and the fact I had ear infection while in Vietnam and reported to sick bay a couple of times. I also had combat duty and a MOS that is listed on the noise list by the military.

If you win your case it will help a lot of vets so it will be a fight but it surely a fight worth fighting!

Stillhere

[Jon1371]

I wish you fair winds and following seas and I hope you get what is owed to you.

[john999]

Every time a vet successfully challenges one of the VA's arbitrary regulations it is a win for all. I remember that for those ETS'ing out of Vietnam they were told that if they wanted an exit exam they would have to wait a few months in the military to get the exam. The army knew that guys who had were ETS'ing out of Nam were not going to hand around for weeks or months as a casual on KP to get an exam. Just another calculated way the G.I. gets screwed. I never had an exit exam, but the army declares I had a physical and psychological exam. Does anyone here remember getting a psychological exam when they were discharged from the army after Vietnam?

My lawyer based a large part of his argument on Cushman, but the judges said there was no similarity between excluding evidence, and altering evidence. What can you do but go to court? How many billions of dollars has the government saved by screwing vets all the way to the grave and then screwing their widows?