Caring. Effective. Efficient.

Client Win: CAVC No. 20-5053, Armstead v. McDonough (BVA must provide fair process in Dependency Indemnity Compensation appeal))

Client Win: CAVC No. 20-5053, Armstead v. McDonough (BVA must provide fair process in Dependency Indemnity Compensation appeal))

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 lymphoma.

His wife, the appellant, sought service connection of the cause of death based on the veteran's alleged exposure to Agent Orange while serving in Guam and/or at a Royal Thai Air Force Base (RTAFB) in Thailand during the Vietnam war

The appeal was resolved through a joint motion to remand.

ISSUE ON APPEAL TO THE CAVC (BVA must provide fair process in Dependency Indemnity Compensation appeal)

While on remand from the BVA, the VA issued a Supplemental Statement of Case (SSOC) continuing its denial of DIC to the late-veteran's spouse.

She asked the BVA to keep the record open for 90-days for her to submit additional evidence in support of her appeal. There was no dispute that the VA received the request on April 9, 2019. On April 10, 2019, the BVA denied the DIC appeal without discussing the request to keep the record open. 

RESOLUTION AT THE CAVC.

The Court found that principles of fair process prohibit the BVA from issuing an adverse decision until it either receives evidence or argument or until the time requested by an appellant or the time provided by the Board of Veterans Appeals to submit additional evidence or argument has passed. Bryant v. Wilkie, 33 Vet. App. 43 (2020).

The VA's Office of General Counsel agreed that the BVA erred and should have addressed whether the request to keep the record open was received prior to the BVA decision and, if so, provide fair process to the appellant

If you have a DIC or accrued benefits claim pending before the VA or BVA, or if the BVA has ignored your request to keep the record open in any kind of veteran or survivor benefits appeal, and would like help appealing to the CAVC, click here to have  Attig | Curran | Steel take a look at your case.

Case Details

OGC Attorney: Katelyn Lancto (link to attorney's bio on LinkedIn)

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

Board of Veterans Appeals Veterans Law Judge:  B.T. Knope (link to judge's bio on LinkedIn)

Attorney for the Board of Veterans Appeals: M. Pryce (attorney bio not available)

Vets’ Rep at BVA: Stacey Clark, Attorney (Morgan & Morgan) (attorney bio on firm's website)

Date of BVA Decision: April 10, 2019

Date of CAVC Joint Motion to Remand: February 3, 2021   

Link to BVA Decision

Link to CAVC Joint Motion for Remand

 

Taking Point! Blog

Jun
3
I really can’t take it anymore. I’m sure many like you feel the same way. Every time another child with a military weapon ambushes a school full of children, I am overwhelmed with emotions that have no outlet. I can’t even process… Read More
May
27
  While on our way to the nutcracker audition at the local theatre I asked my 9-year-old daughter how her day went at school. “It was okay.  We had another active shooter drill.  When the drill started, I had to run behind and under my teacher… Read More
May
23
After years of exploring different fields, I’ve found purpose-driven work here, at Attig | Curran | Steel.   There are a lot of variables in the experience of “happy.” It is difficult to keep it continuous.  Do I feel happy when my kids… Read More
May
18
When appellate courts review the decisions of lower courts – or in administrative law where a Court like the US Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) reviews the decisions of the BVA, an administrative tribunal – they use “… Read More

Read the "Taking Point!" Blog

Recent Cases

This case involves the BVA judge’s inadequate reasoning of a denial of a veteran’s claim for an increased rating for PTSD.   The appeal was resolved through a joint motion to remand. ISSUE ON APPEAL TO THE CAVC (BVA overlooked evidence… Read More
This case involves the BVA judge’s inadequate reasoning of his denial of a veteran’s past-due benefits in a claim for an increased rating due to an increase in the severity of the veteran’s PTSD. The appeal was resolved through a jo… Read More
This case involves the BVA’s failure to comply with a Veterans Court Order in a January 2020 Memorandum Decision. The appeal was resolved through a joint motion to remand. ISSUE ON APPEAL TO THE CAVC (BVA fails to comply with Veterans Court Ord… Read More

See More Appellate Results