FYI heads up Big Supreme Court Case to be argues Tuesday 10/4/22.

[jbasser]

If a Veteran is direct Service connected why should his claim not go back to the date of service.

 

 

https://www.scotusblog.com/2022/10/justices-will-consider-equitable-tolling-for-a-veteran-suffering-from-ptsd/

Edited October 4, 2022 by jbasser
grammer

[Mr cue]

I will bet my house this will not fly with court.

Open to many doors to to many veterans.

This with all the water claims will back the system up so bad it would be years before new veteran claim from service would even be address at the regional office.

Not try to be Deb downer but things are already crazy at the va these days.

Didn't the supreme court just shot down the last veteran case that was in front of them.

 

 

 

[Vync]

16 minutes ago, Mr cue said:

I will bet my house this will not fly with court.

Open to many doors to to many veterans.

This with all the water claims will back the system up so bad it would be years before new veteran claim from service would even be address at the regional office.

Not try to be Deb downer but things are already crazy at the va these days.

Didn't the supreme court just shot down the last veteran case that was in front of them.

Honestly, I agree with you that the supremes will likely side with the VA. Last term they heard George v. McDonough (https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/george-v-mcdonough), which should have been a slam dunk for the veteran, but they sided with the VA 6-3. I have a feeling Arellano v. McDonough will end up being 6-3 or 5-4 (most likely) for the VA.

Every time a veteran appeal reaches the supremes, the VA uses many of the same arguments like it will generate a ton of new claims, deplete their funding allocations, etc...

In my unprofessional opinion, veteran appeals should be a very high priority for the court. Their decisions should not be trickled out at the end of the term. Instead, they should be turned around in just a few weeks.

 

This quote says a lot and is taken from the final brief filed by the veteran (https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21-432/233802/20220817145538938_Arellano Merits Reply Brief.pdf)

Quote

The pro-veteran canon, like the Irwin presumption, finds its roots in congressional intent. Congress “has designed and fully intends to maintain a beneficial non-adversarial system of veterans benefits,” particularly for “service-connected disability compensation.” H.R. Rep. No. 100-963, at 13 (1988), reprinted in 1988 U.S.C.C.A.N. 5782, 5795. “This entire scheme is imbued with special beneficence from a grateful sovereign.” Barrett v. Principi, 363 F.3d 1316, 1320 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (citation omitted). Here, between Irwin’s presumptive force and the pro-veteran canon, petitioner starts with two thumbs on the scale, whereas the Secretary starts with zero. Cf. Justice Scalia Headlines the Twelfth CAVC Judicial Conference, VETERANS L.J. 1 (Summer 2013), (J. Scalia describing the pro-veteran canon as “more like a fist than a thumb, as it should be.”).

 

 

[Whodat]

12 hours ago, Stayfocus said:

10% is the max you can be granted for tinnitus.

You are correct. 10 is the max. Was I was explaining it that once I had gotten out of the military, all I had gotten was 10% and it was for tinnitus. 

[Mr cue]

19 minutes ago, Vync said:

Last term they heard George v. McDonough (https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/george-v-mcdonough), which should have been a slam dunk for the veteran

Yes this is the case I am talking about but like this case it will open to many doors for veterans.

An I just cant see it but if it did.

I have a few issues that were grant that I would love to have a 1993 eef for them. Date of service lol

[Lemuel]

Decision may make mute my "Next of Friend" claim for all veterans with organic brain syndromes that was filed 11/26/1994 with a claim dated in 1987.  (TBI residuals and cerebral malaria residuals) if negative.  If positive will support.

[Lemuel]

1 hour ago, Whodat said:

You are correct. 10 is the max. Was I was explaining it that once I had gotten out of the military, all I had gotten was 10% and it was for tinnitus. 

The Director, Compensation Service can award higher rating for Tinnitus.  My BVA Decision of 5/17/2017 remanded for a higher rating but was made mute by the awarding of TDIU as far as compensation.  It is in my current appeal of the remand decisions that were ignored except for TDIU.

I was denied a forklift operator's permit by the Navy during my 1961-1974 Naval Service in 1965 because of tinnitus which is uncorrectable by hearing aids.  It even interferes with the warning signals of a dishwasher making that mode of employment mute.