» Chief Judge Robert N. Davis
Episode 006: CAVC Oral Argument: Atencio v. Wilkie, 16-1561 (April 26, 2018)(Gulf War Syndrome presumptions and GERD)
What the ‘MUCMI’ is going on with GERD? PREVIEW OF THE CASE: General Overview of the Medicine Some terms you will hear in this argument: GERD is Gastro Esophageal Reflux Disorder. GERD can often – but not always -result from a dysfu…
Read More
April 27th, 2018
Contributor: Chris Attig
Categories: Veterans Law Updates
Tags: 2018 CAVC Oral Arguments, 38 CFR 3.317, 38 USC 1117, 38 USC 1118, Alexandra Lio, Auer v. Robbins 519 U.S. 452 (1997), Catherine D. Vel, CCK, Chief Judge Robert N. Davis, Christian A. McTarnaghan, Denver CO VARO, Gastroesophageal Reflux Disorder (GERD), Gulf War Syndrome, Judge Amanda L. Meredith, Judge Michael Allen, Medically Unexplained Chronic Multisymptom Illness (MUCMI), Michelle L. Kane, podcast, presumption of service connection
Episode 005: CAVC Oral Argument: Simmons v. Wilkie (16-3039)(CAVC Application of Harmless Error Rule)
General Overview of Harmless Error law. The major question in this case is how the CAVC should apply the harmless error rule when it might involve making findings of fact. The Court stated in its supplemental briefing order that it “…has…
Read More
April 25th, 2018
Contributor: Chris Attig
Categories: Veterans Law Updates
Tags: 38 USC 105(a), 38 USC 1111, 38 USC 7261(b), Chief Judge Robert N. Davis, Clear and Unmistakeable Error (CUE), Harmless Error, Joshua L. Wolinsky, Judge Margaret Bartley, Judge Michael Allen, Ken Carpenter, Kotteakos v. US 328 US 750 (1946), presumption of aggravation, presumption of soundness, Shinseki v. Sanders 556 U.S. 396 (2009), Winston Salem NC VARO
Episode 004: CAVC Oral Argument - Johnson v. Wilkie, #16-3808 (April 24, 2018) Successive Rating Criteria for Migraines)
General Preview of the Case: This is a complex case involving the complex issue of “successive rating criteria”, with a lot of regulatory interpretation and factual application issues at play. There is one, and possibly more, diagnostic c…
Read More
April 24th, 2018
Contributor: Chris Attig
Categories: Veterans Law Updates
Tags: 38 CFR 4.21, 38 CFR 4.3, 38 CFR 4.7, Camacho v. Nicholson 21 Vet.App. 360 (2007), Chief Judge Robert N. Davis, DC 8100, migraines, NVLSP, Paul Sorisio, Pierce v. Principi 18 Vet.App. 440 (2004), Raymond J. Kim, Roanoke VA VARO, Sarah E. Wolf, successive rating criteria, Tatum v. Shinseki 23 Vet. App. 152 (2009)
FCOA Precedent Alert: Saunders v. Wilkie, #2017-1466 (A Veteran can service connect stand-alone pain)
What is the Deep Issue in the Case? This case involves the question of whether a veteran can service connect stand alone pain as a disability for the purposes of VA disability compensation. The basic VA disability compensation statute is clear: the V…
Read More
April 17th, 2018
Contributor: Chris Attig
Categories: Veterans Law Updates
Tags: 2018 Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, 38 CFR 4.1, 38 USC 1110, American Legion, Chief Judge Robert N. Davis, Circuit Judge Kathleen O'Malley, Circuit Judge Pauline Newman, Circuit Judge Timothy B. Dyk, Judge Coral W. Pietsch, Judge Mary J. Schoelen, knee, Mark E. Porada, Melanie L. Bostwick, NVLSP, Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe, Patrick Berkshire, Roanoke VA VARO, Shereen Marcus, stand alone pain, Thomas J. Dannaher
Episode 002: PRECEDENTIAL CAVC CASE ALERT: Turner v. Shulkin (16-1171)(Receipt of New and Material Evidence)
What is the Deep Issue in the Case? New and material evidence received between the issuance of a VA Ratings Decision and a Notice of Disagreement is considered as filed in connection with the claim which was pending at the beginning of the appeal per…
Read More
February 15th, 2018
Contributor: Chris Attig
Categories: Veterans Law Updates
PRECEDENTIAL CAVC CASE ALERT: Harvey v. Shulkin (16-1515)(Lawyer as Medical Expert)
What is the Deep Issue in the Case? The Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims has laid out clear standards for determining the adequacy of a VA expert opinion in a VA disability compensation claim. Accord, e.g., Monzingo v. Shinseki, 26 Vet.App. 97 (2…
Read More
February 9th, 2018
Contributor: Chris Attig
PRECEDENTIAL CAVC CASE ALERT: Foreman v. Shulkin (14-3463)(VA PTSD Effective Date)
What is the Deep Issue in the Case? The general effective date rule says that the later of the date entitlement arose and the date of the claim for benefits is the effective date for a VA PTSD claim. 38 C.F.R. §3.400. When a liberalizing rule change…
Read More
February 1st, 2018
Contributor: Chris Attig
PRECEDENTIAL FCOA CASE ALERT: Crediford v. Shulkin (16-1386)
What is the Deep Issue in the Case? Author note: Typically, I work to keep “Deep Issue” summaries below 100 words. I believe this decision is significant, and have worked to keep the Deep Issue as brief as possible while accurately portra…
Read More
January 17th, 2018
Contributor: Chris Attig
Categories: Veterans Law Updates
Tags: 38 CFR 3.1(m), 38 CFR 3.301, 38 USC 105(a), 38 USC 7104, A.C. Mackenzi, Chief Judge Robert N. Davis, Circuit Judge Evan J. Wallach, Circuit Judge Kathleen O'Malley, Circuit Judge Pauline Newman, Daenia L. Paert, Ken Carpenter, Line of Duty, Military Order of the Purple Heart, Oakland CA VARO, Peter J. Meadows, Willful Misconduct
Case Review: 16-3258, Efrem Knowles
What is the Deep Issue in the Case? The probative value of a medical opinion in a VA benefits claim derives from the factually accurate, fully articulated, sound reasoning for the conclusion. Nieves-Rodriguez v Peake, 22 Vet. App. 295, 304(2008). The…
Read More
December 7th, 2017
Contributor: Chris Attig
Case Review: CAVC #16-2628, George Kemp, Jr. v. Shulkin
What is the “Deep Issue” in the case? A veteran is entitled to special monthly compensation (SMC) if, owing to a service-connected disability the veteran suffered anatomical loss of use of one or both feet. 38 U.S.C. § 1114(k), (l). A ve…
Read More
December 5th, 2017
Categories: Veterans Law Updates
