va failed to consider the law is that cue ?

[mos1833]

broncovet . i have not posted on here for quite a while,and i still cant spell ha. 

any way here my problem, my back claim has been up to the federal circuit . and to the court 

three or four times, i had a good law fir working for me so i let them handle things.

they got me remanded to the board many times, i never had the nexus opinion.

well i had one but they shot it down.

the point i want to cue is that according to law at some point in all the reviews ,they never considered G P O  82-90 that explains how to decide if a disability is a defect or a disease 82-90

should they have considered it on their own, or does it fall on me to point it out.

i want to use  ( O'bryan ) as a model , this claim is a tough one ,but this is the issue i want to deal with now, thanks for any advice .from any body.

[Gastone]

Your VA Lawyers got their Legal Fees paid by the VA based on the CAVC Remands, right?

Sounds like the Remands did not provide the Decision you wanted. What did your Lawyers have to say or did they beg off on further representation. Are the Appeals Decisions  considered Final and Closed?

May be prudent to run your "CUE" theory by AskNod.

[mos1833]

thanks for your reply gastone,i think asknot has his hands full helping others.

i was just reading  ( O'bryan ) AND THAT claim is the same as mine.

they denied my claim in 1985 because they my back had a defect, and then a couple of years ago used the same reasons to deny again, thanks

Edited November 6, 2017 by mos1833
left out a word

[mos1833]

my biggest problem is that the va says my separation exam was normal and i did not complain about my back at the time ,

i told them i did not have an examination when i separated , so i need somebody that can interpret my dod form 600 and form 93 must be able to show he or she know what they are reading, a pro, can any one help reading my forms , thanks

[Berta]

This is what a DOD form 93 is:

http://www.benning.army.mil/garrison/dhr/content/PDF/Record_of_Emergency_Data_Instruction_Brief.pdf

Basically contact info for emergencys or next of kin stuff.I think every enlisted has this form in their Mil records.

DOD form 600 is ,I think, the same as a SF 600:

A chronology of medical records.

http://www.med.navy.mil/sites/nmcphc/Documents/oem/MatrixSinglePrograms/131-3_a44_SF600.pdf

I am a civilian so I do not feel I am able to read them. If you scan and attach them here maybe someone can help.

(Cover any identifying info)

[Gastone]

Your Back problem, is there a DX or SickBay complaint & Treatment Notes in your SMRs?

I'm sure by now you've  filed FOIA's for both your C-File and your SMR.

It's extremely difficult to believe some sort of Discharge Exam wasn't completed, even if it was merely cursory in nature indicating Hgt, Wt, BP, and Dental problems.

[broncovet]

Have you ordered a copy of your cfile?  If not, you should do so.  It sounds like your lawfirm certainly would.   

As far as a seperation exam being inaccurate, you may be able to correct that using the follow

 

Quote

 

1.579 Amendment of records.

(a) Any individual may request amendment of any Department of Veterans Affairs record pertaining to him or her. Not later than 10 days (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal public holidays) after the date or receipt of such request, the Department of Veterans Affairs will acknowledge in writing such receipt. The Department of Veterans Affairs will complete the review to amend or correct a record as soon as reasonably possible, normally within 30 days from the receipt of the request (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal public holidays) unless unusual circumstances preclude completing action within that time. The Department of Veterans Affairs will promptly either:

(1) Correct any part thereof which the individual believes is not accurate, relevant, timely or complete; or

(2) Inform the individual of the Department of Veterans Affairs refusal to amend the record in accordance with his or her request, the reason for the refusal, the procedures by which the individual may request a review of that refusal by the Secretary or designee, and the name and address of such official.

 

As Gastone correctly pointed out, this could/should be identified by other records in service.  

Keep with the basics, tho.   Remember "notation on the exit exam" is NOT one of the Caluza elements required for service connection.  Instead, a current diagnois, in service event or aggravation, and nexus are all required.  

You indicated they "shot down" your nexus.  This suggests you need a IMO/IME to refute the VA shooting down your nexus with additional medical evidence.  

If your claim is still pending, you could obtain an IMO/IME and still get your effective date under 38 cfr 3.156 b or 3.156 c.  

If Obrian is a "precedential case" and you have a similar fact pattern you should be able to expect a similar result.  

Precedential cases are panel, en banc CAVC, plus any federal circuit, plus any US Supreme court deciosn.  

Single judge CAVC or bva decisions are not precedential.