Supreme Court cases; at least one affects CUE

[broncovet]

The US Supreme court cases involving Veterans law are always important.  

Two of these seem to be significant:

1.  George vs McDonough

    

Quote

Issue: Whether, when the Department of Veterans Affairs denies a veteran’s claim for benefits in reliance on an agency interpretation that is later deemed invalid under the plain text of the statutory provisions in effect at the time of the denial, that is the kind of “clear and unmistakable error” that the veteran may invoke to challenge VA’s decision

The Supreme Court has granted the petition, (Writ of Certiorari), which means Scotus has agreed to hear this case.  (Scotus only agrees to hear a very small portion of cases presented).  

2.  Blanton Vs. McDonough.  Go Ken Carpenter, who alleges that VA's CUE standard, found in Cook, is too restrictive, and inconsistent with Congress Intent to make VA benefits a "pro claimant non adversarial system".   Mr. Carpenter suggests that VA makes errors, and the Veteran needs a way to correct said errors, and the Federal Circuit's CUE standards are in error, inconsistent with congress intent.  

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/20/20-1271/171573/20210310171631832_19-2009cert petition.pdf

    I was unable to find out if Blanton Writ of Certiorari petition was granted, but, its possible that  the above cases were merged, as both involve CUE.  Thanks Berta, for this Scotus case!  

[Vync]

@broncovet Thanks for posting this.

I actually won a CUE early last year similar to the first case. The VA reduced an initial rating due to aggravation by 10% just because the C&P doctor said I had the condition prior to service. I showed them the plain language of the reg dealing with pre-existing reductions which must be in terms of the schedule. I checked the rating criteria and 10% did not include any info about because the vet had it before service. They granted CUE. I guess veteran George did not win due to the VA's inability to read and it's now with the supremes.

Berta posted a link to Blanton the other day which I found fascinating. That one sums things up as the court legislating by the bench. The VA is allowed to be non-adversarial until they want to be adversarial and too bad for the vets.