Caring. Effective. Efficient.

CAVC finds BVA denial of higher PTSD rating "disconcerting".

CAVC finds BVA denial of higher PTSD rating

When this veteran sought a PTSD rating higher than 30% for his service connected mental health condition, the Board of Veterans Appeals denied a PTSD rating higher than 30%.

The Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims entered an order finding that the BVA Judge's errors were "disconcerting" particularly in light of the existence of evidence supporting a 70% PTSD rating, and because the BVA Veterans Law Judge failed to explain why the veteran's symptoms did not reach the 50% PTSD Rating level.

Attig | Steel coordinated with the law firm of Hill & Ponton to handle the veteran's remand to the BVA.

Link to the BVA Decision on CAVC Website.

Link to the Joint Motion to Remand the CAVC Website.

Case Details

OGC Attorney: Catherine A. Hulgan

Veteran Representation at CAVC: Chris Attig (link to bio)

Board of Veterans Appeals Veterans Law Judge:Deborah W. Singleton

Regional Office: St. Petersburg, Florida VARO

Vets’ Rep at BVA: Christopher Loiacono (agent)

Date of BVA Decision: September 21, 2016

Date of CAVC Remand Order: March 30, 2017

Recent Cases

Client Win: CAVC No. 21-2655, (BVA overlooked evidence of suicidal ideation in claim for an increased PTSD rating)
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
Client Win: CAVC No. 21-0394, (BVA erred in denying past-due benefits in claim for an increased rating)
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
Client Win: CAVC No. 21-0140 (BVA fails to comply with a Veterans Court Order).
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

Taking Point! Blog

May
23
Working with Purpose.
May 23rd, 2022
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
Four standards of review at the Veterans Court.
May 18th, 2022
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
May
16
A Tale of Two Veterans.
May 16th, 2022
Let me tell you the story of two veterans. The first veteran – we’ll call him Jim – claimed he was exposed to herbicides – Agent Orange – outside of the Republic of Vietnam. After the VA spent decades denying his claim,… Read More
Mar
2
Veterans Court: What constitutes loss of use of a reproductive organ for purposes of SMC?
March 2nd, 2021
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

Read the "Taking Point!" Blog