Caring. Effective. Efficient.

» Chief Judge Robert N. Davis

Episode 008: Get your chocolate bar out of my peanut butter! (The role of intent in determining the scope of a VA Claim)

Shameless plug for sponsorships for the podcast.  If you are getting value from the VA Form 21 Blog and Podcast, and want to become a sponsor, you can become a patron, or sponsor, by clicking here: Sponsor the VA Form 21 Podcast on Patreon. Sponsors… Read More
Read More

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
Read More

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
Read More

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… Read More
Read More

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: t… Read More
Read More

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 p… Read More
Read More

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. 9… Read More
Read More

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… Read More
Read More

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 portr… Read More
Read More

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
Read More

Recent Cases

This case involves the special, and very powerful, Nehmer effective date rules.  Mr. Greene, the veteran, sought an effective date for his service connected coronary artery disease. He argued his effective date should go back to 2006, the first clai… Read More
This case involves the BVA’s rejection of a theory of service connection by aggravation for a back condition. The BVA refused to service connect the veteran’s back injury, which he argued was aggravated by service-connected knee and hip i… Read More
  This case involves a veteran who served in the Air Force from 1953 to 1957. During service, he injured his back on a flight line, and has repeatedly tried to service connect the injury since leaving service in 1957. Each time, the claim was de… Read More

See More Appellate Results

VA Form 21 Blog

Sep
30
Earlier this year, I tested an idea – what if a group of lawyers grabbed a virtual cup of coffee every Monday morning and chatted about their progress building a profitable law firm that prioritizes the attorney’s well being? Thos… Read More
Sep
6
If you hear the phrase, lawyers with a purpose, what is your immediate reaction? Do you roll your eyes? Yawn? Close this page and find something else to read? I’ll be honest, the first time a business coach told me that my law practice… Read More

Read the VA Form 21 Blog