Caring. Effective. Efficient.

Client Win: CAVC No. 20-4843, C.Smith v. McDonough (Agent Orange exposure in Thailand)

Client Win: CAVC No. 20-4843, C.Smith v. McDonough (Agent Orange exposure in Thailand)

This case involved a US Army veteran (1967 to 1971) who was seeking service connection for hypertension, congestive heart failure, Type II diabetes, stroke, and atrial fibrillation due to agent orange exposure in Thailand during the Vietnam war.

The appeal was resolved through a joint motion to remand.

ISSUE ON APPEAL TO THE CAVC (Agent Orange exposure in Thailand).

The BVA is required to provide a statement of adequate reasons and bases about its findings of fact and conclusions of law on all material issues. 38 U.S.C. §7104(d). 

The BVA is also required to analyze the probative value of the evidence, account for evidence it finds persuasive or unpersuasive, and explain why it rejects favorable evidence. Caluza v. Brown, 7 Vet.App. 498, 506 (1995).

In this case the BVA denied service connection for the veteran's disabilities due to herbicide exposure, specifically agent orange exposure in Thailand at the Uda Poa Royal Thai Air Force Base in Thailand. 

RESOLUTION AT THE CAVC.

The veteran told the BVA that he had also experienced agent orange exposure in Thailand at the U-Tapao Royal Thai Air Force Base during the Vietnam war.

Because the BVA did not provide any analysis regarding the veteran's allegations that he was also exposed to agent orange at U-Tapao RTAFB, the BVA committed what is called a reasons and bases error. The BVA did not provide reasons and bases for ignoring evidence favorable to the veteran.

If the VA or the BVA denied you   for disabilities you believe resulted from exposure to agent orange in Thailand during the Vietnam war, and if you would like to discuss legal representation in your appeal of that BVA or VA rating decision, click here to have  Attig | Curran | Steel take a look at your case.

Case Details

OGC Attorney: Colin E. Tansits (link to attorney's bio on LinkedIn)

Veteran Representation at CAVC: Alexandra Curran (link to bio)

Board of Veterans Appeals Veterans Law Judge:  R. Erdheim

Attorney for the BVA: D. Houle

Vets’ Rep at BVA: Sarah K. Hill (Hill and Ponton) (Link to attorney's appeals handled by Attig | Curran | Steel)

Date of BVA Decision: March 16, 2020

Date of CAVC Joint Motion to Remand:   February 16, 2021

Link to BVA Decision

Link to CAVC Memorandum Decision

 

Recent Cases

This case involves an Army veteran who served on active duty in 1991 and then from 2008 to 2009 who was seeking a service-connected major depressive disorder rating in excess of 30%. The appeal was resolved through a joint motion to remand. ISSUE ON… Read More
This case involves a survivor’s claim for entitlement to Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC). The appellant’s late-husband served in the US Air Force from 1964 – 1984, and passed away from a rare form of non-Hodgkins lymphom… Read More
This case involved a US Army veteran (1967 to 1971) who was seeking service connection for hypertension, congestive heart failure, Type II diabetes, stroke, and atrial fibrillation due to agent orange exposure in Thailand during the Vietnam war. The… Read More

See More Appellate Results

Taking Point! Blog

Mar
2
In January 2021, the loss of use of a reproductive organ for SMC purposes was the focus of a panel of judges from the U.S. Court of Appeals Veterans Claims issued a precedential opinion in Bria v. Wilkie.   The panel consisted of Judge Mere… Read More
Feb
26
In January 2021, the VA rating for prostate cancer was the focus of a panel of judges from the U.S. Court of Appeals Veterans Claims issued a precedential opinion in Bailey v. Wilkie.   The panel consisted of Chief Judge Bartley (who… Read More
Feb
26
  Bold and unapologetically honest, Pam Keith is a refreshing political voice you need to follow right now.  She smoothly articulates the most rocky and controversial topics of our time.  It is no surprise that this attorney with 25 years of expe… Read More
Feb
12
In November 2020, a panel of judges from the U.S. Court of Appeals Veterans Claims issued a precedential opinion in Holmes v. Wilkie.   In it, the Court laid out a road map for Veterans trying to get the correct VA rating for migraines… Read More

Read the "Taking Point!" Blog