BVA Hearing Delay

[Lemuel]

How long should I give the BVA to set up my new hearing before appealing to the CAVC about the delay?

My BVA appeal is at the BVA but no hearing has been held yet on my 1/31/2021 appeal.

I still have not had my BVA hearing that will include remands not accomplished from my 2017 BVA Decision.  

This time I wrote a brief asking for previous decisions to be re-opened by the BVA based upon errors and maleficent by the RO and DRO, copying errors in past decisions, eliminating favorable to me records in the decisions, lost records and destroyed records that can be proved to have existed by references in VA letters, etc.  The office of the BVA has contacted me twice since receiving the brief.

COVID has delayed my BVA hearing plus the complicated issues of having a lost and destroyed medical record as previously noted.  I understand the delay so have not appealed the delay to the CAVC yet.  I am considering if the delay continues past 24 months, I will appeal the delay to the CAVC under a precedence that the BVA should provide the hearing within 18 months.  (Actually, not a precedence--the precedence is forwarding the appeal to the BVA and the BVA has tried to provide hearings within 18 months)

Biggest issues are:

1. EED TBI to date filed an unprocessed 1987 next of friend claim to the extra-schedular process for all veterans with service-connected organic brain syndromes.  (EED will not affect my compensation but will affect those whose compensation was limited by the limitations in the law passed by congress in the 2008 TBI bill by 11 years for Vietnam vets)

2.  Back pay paid by current rates under the 5th Amendment and 14th Amendment Constitutional guarantees.

3. Re-opening of claims under 38 CFR 20.1000.

4. Treating unscanned medical files as lost as those in the fire at NPRC because of the VA Medical Divisions inability to provide them in a timely manner.  (Within 18 months per precedence)

5. Mistreatment of my temporal lobe epilepsy in 1990 with Tegretol on two counts listed on page 983 of the 1990 Edition of the PDR (Physicians Desk Reference for pharmaceuticals) causing a delay in effective treatment to August of 2015. 

So far, the contact from the Office of the BVA has only been about the documents that are missing from my VA comp and pen file and are not available to the BVA because they are destroyed and must be recovered from the "hard copy" VA Medical Division medical file that has not yet been scanned into my VA medical file causing me to have to give history from memory without my treating physicians being able to look at the actual documented history of being confirmed to have temporal lobe epilepsy and having been mistreated with Tegretol plus the MVA of 1990 caused by the epilepsy that resulted in secondary spinal injury.

The hard copy medical file is probably in that VA OIG found 5 plus mile high stack of unscanned documents and not in an individually priority recoverable organization.

[broncovet]

CCK has dozens, if not hundreds of cases at CAVC.  Its not known if the case was even filed at CAVC, it could have been filed by another court.  No, CCK law is not a scam.  

Quite possible:

    Not every case is available for public view.  Sometimes they are hidden or redacted.  

Its even possible you spelled a name wrong, or other wise your search was faulty.  I have done that more than once.  

[Lemuel]

53 minutes ago, broncovet said:

CCK has dozens, if not hundreds of cases at CAVC.  Its not known if the case was even filed at CAVC, it could have been filed by another court.  No, CCK law is not a scam.  

Quite possible:

    Not every case is available for public view.  Sometimes they are hidden or redacted.  

Its even possible you spelled a name wrong, or other wise your search was faulty.  I have done that more than once.  

Why were they unwilling to give an attorney list for search.  I searched Chisholm in addition to the full firm name and came up with nothing.  I searched my last name Bray under attorney search and came up with all of my pro se case with me listed as the attorney with another actual attorney with the last name Bray in addition to the other pro se last name Bray.

As you can see in my chat thread above, I  warned the clerk that I would post the thread on Hadit.com if they were unwilling to cite cases filed.  They could at least give cases that are finale.

That leaves the only way that they are not listed is if the name "Chisholm" is blocked including a pro se last name Chisholm filer. What would cause that?  Try it yourself if you think something is wrong with my search.  I will try a pacer search in all federal courts to see if they have anything there.

[Lemuel]

1 hour ago, broncovet said:

CCK has dozens, if not hundreds of cases at CAVC.  Its not known if the case was even filed at CAVC, it could have been filed by another court.  No, CCK law is not a scam.  

Quite possible:

    Not every case is available for public view.  Sometimes they are hidden or redacted.  

Its even possible you spelled a name wrong, or other wise your search was faulty.  I have done that more than once.  

Cannot use my PACER account to search federal courts by attorney.  Need to have case names or case numbers to search via PACER.

Do you actually have a CCK case number or case name that they have been attorneys of record on that I can search for posting a "sorry I was wrong about them on this thread?" 

There is no reason that I know of to seal a CAVC case entirely.  If you make a mistake and put unredacted identity documents in a filing that filing will be sealed at both the CAVC and the CAFC.  The only reason to seal the attorney's name is if they were or are under disciplinary action by the court.

[Lemuel]

1 hour ago, broncovet said:

CCK has dozens, if not hundreds of cases at CAVC.  Its not known if the case was even filed at CAVC, it could have been filed by another court.  No, CCK law is not a scam.  

Quite possible:

    Not every case is available for public view.  Sometimes they are hidden or redacted.  

Its even possible you spelled a name wrong, or other wise your search was faulty.  I have done that more than once.  

I found a possibility that I am wrong.  There are 4 cases from 1999 to 2015 with J. Scott Kilpatrick (properly spelled) and one earlier case by a Mike Kilpatrick at the CAVC.  That is not even a half a dozen since the CAVC opened for business.

I guess it is possible the Chisholm's retired or are deceased and the remaining Kilpatrick partner is running the show.  Still, that is not very many cases at the CAVC for all the advertisements you see by CCK in over 20 years.  None within the last 5 years.

Granted there are probably 50 for one vet cases that the veteran wants to appeal beyond the BVA that do not have a cause for appeal.  But that is not a good omen for selecting CCK to represent you.

Better to see if your state has sponsored a pro-bono firm that will take the case after a BVA Decision like Nebraska.  Never was able to get a response out of the Wyoming Veteran's Assistance office but apparently the Nebraska pro bono firm is willing to help me after I get the BVA Decision.

[Vync]

20 hours ago, Lemuel said:

Why were they unwilling to give an attorney list for search.

Perhaps for the same reason they "renovated" the BVA decision search portal to remove all of the fields to help customize your search and find what you want... The result made it more difficult for veterans and others to more easily find results.

[Lemuel]

46 minutes ago, Vync said:

Perhaps for the same reason they "renovated" the BVA decision search portal to remove all of the fields to help customize your search and find what you want... The result made it more difficult for veterans and others to more easily find results.

Sorry, I was not talking about the VA refusing to give the attorney list.  I ask the clerk at CCK for their attorney list so I could search attorneys by using the "attorney" check box on the CAVC docket search.

I am surprised that no one with the last name, Chisholm, ever file a case at the CAVC since it opened.  Plenty of Brays including me in pro se and one attorney have filed cases.  

The VA BVA search has probably been lobbied out by legal search engines that you have to pay to subscribe such as, Fast Case.  Lots of them now and the ones attorneys use cost a lot per year.