Podcasts about veterans claims

In this case, the court considered this issue: Must the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims ensure that the benefit-of-the-doubt rule in 38 U-S-C § 5107(b) was properly applied during the claims process in order to satisfy 38 U-S-C § 7261(b)(1)?The case was decided on March 5, 2025.The Supreme Court held that the Department of Veterans Affairs' determination that evidence regarding a disability claim is in “approximate balance” is a factual determination subject to clear-error review by the Veterans Court. Justice Clarence Thomas authored the 7-2 majority opinion of the Court.The statute at issue, 38 U-S-C §7261(b)(1), requires the Veterans Court to “take due account” of the VA's application of the benefit-of-the-doubt rule. This provision does not establish a new standard of review but instead directs the Veterans Court to review such determinations under the standards in §7261(a), which provides for de novo review of legal questions and clear-error review of factual findings. Determining whether evidence is in approximate balance involves both legal and factual components, as the VA must marshal and weigh evidence while also applying the legal “approximate balance” standard. Because this determination is primarily factual, clear-error review is appropriate.Petitioners argued that the Veterans Court should review the "approximate balance" determination de novo, comparing it to judicial review of probable-cause determinations, but this analogy is flawed. The probable-cause inquiry involves substantial legal reasoning and constitutional concerns, whereas the VA's assessment of evidence balance is specific to each case and lacks broader legal implications. The statute's language does not support imposing de novo review, nor does the canon against surplusage justify a different reading. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson authored a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Neil Gorsuch joined.The opinion is presented here in its entirety, but with citations omitted. If you appreciate this episode, please subscribe. Thank you. 

We're pleased to have as our guest Daniel Whitehead. Daniel was a 2022 James Wilson Fellow. He served in the General Counsel's Office of Governor Ron DeSantis and has clerked on two federal courts, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit and the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. He was also a John Marshall Fellow of the Claremont Institute. He is currently a Senior Fellow of the Hungary Foundation, where he is spending a year living in Budapest. We were eager to hear about Daniel's experience in Hungary living amidst the Hungarian people, learning the Hungarian language, and conducting original research and writing. We also discuss his recent article we republished at Anchoring Truths titled Securitization: A Solution to the Migration Crisis in the United States.

In this episode of Arguendo: The Veterans Law Podcast, Amy Odom and Amy Kretkowski discuss the Supreme Court's October 16, 2024, oral arguments in Bufkin v. McDonough. The case centers on the interpretation of 38 U.S.C. § 7261(b)(1) and the scope of review that the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims must apply regarding the VA's benefit of the doubt rule. Get as the hosts analyze key points raised by advocates and justices, from the standard of review to Congress's intent behind the statute. For more information, visit our websites at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠cck-law.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ and abkveteranslaw.com

QUESTION PRESENTED:Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims must ensure that the benefit-of-the-doubt rule in 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b) was properly applied during the claims process in order to satisfy 38 U.S.C. § 7261(b)(1), which directs the court to “take due account” of the Department of Veterans Affairs' application of that rule. ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

A case in which the Court will decide whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims must ensure that the benefit-of-the-doubt rule in 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b) was properly applied during the claims process in order to satisfy 38 U.S.C. § 7261(b)(1).

A case in which the Court will decide whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims must ensure that the benefit-of-the-doubt rule in 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b) was properly applied during the claims process in order to satisfy 38 U.S.C. § 7261(b)(1).

Each month, a panel of constitutional experts convenes to discuss the Court’s upcoming docket sitting by sitting. The cases covered in this preview are listed below.Royal Canin U.S.A. v. Wullschleger, (October 7) -Federalism & Separation of Powers; Whether a post-removal amendment of a complaint to omit federal questions defeats federal-question subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331; and (2) whether such a post-removal amendment of a complaint precludes a district court from exercising supplemental jurisdiction over the plaintiff’s remaining state-law claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367.Williams v. Washington, (October 7) -Federalism & Separation of Powers; Whether exhaustion of state administrative remedies is required to bring claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in state court.Garland v. VanDerStok, (October 8) -Second Amendment; Whether “a weapon parts kit that is designed to or may readily be completed, assembled, restored, or otherwise converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive” under 27 C.F.R. § 478.11 is a “firearm” regulated by the Gun Control Act of 1968; and (2) whether “a partially complete, disassembled, or nonfunctional frame or receiver” that is “designed to or may readily be completed, assembled, restored, or otherwise converted to function as a frame or receiver” under 27 C.F.R. § 478.12(c) is a “frame or receiver” regulated by the act.Lackey v. Stinnie, (October 8) -Civil Procedure; (1) Whether a party must obtain a ruling that conclusively decides the merits in its favor, as opposed to merely predicting a likelihood of later success, to prevail on the merits under 42 U.S.C. § 1988; and (2) whether a party must obtain an enduring change in the parties’ legal relationship from a judicial act, as opposed to a non-judicial event that moots the case, to prevail under Section 1988.Glossip v. Oklahoma, (October 9) -Criminal Law; (1) Whether the state’s suppression of the key prosecution witness’ admission that he was under the care of a psychiatrist and failure to correct that witness’ false testimony about that care and related diagnosis violate the due process of law under Brady v. Maryland and Napue v. Illinois; (2) whether the entirety of the suppressed evidence must be considered when assessing the materiality of Brady and Napue claims; (3) whether due process of law requires reversal where a capital conviction is so infected with errors that the state no longer seeks to defend it; and (4) whether the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals' holding that the Oklahoma Post-Conviction Procedure Act precluded post-conviction relief is an adequate and independent state-law ground for the judgment.Bouarfa v. Mayorkas, (October 15), -Immigration; Whether a visa petitioner may obtain judicial review when an approved petition is revoked on the basis of nondiscretionary criteria.Medical Marijuana v. Horn, October 15 -Criminal Law; Whether economic harms resulting from personal injuries are injuries to “business or property by reason of” the defendant’s acts for purposes of a civil treble-damages action under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.City and County of San Francisco v. Environmental Protection Agency, (October 16) -Environmental Law & Regulation; Whether the Clean Water Act allows the Environmental Protection Agency (or an authorized state) to impose generic prohibitions in National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits that subject permit-holders to enforcement for violating water quality standards without identifying specific limits to which their discharges must conform.Bufkin v. McDonough, (October 16) -Vetrans Affairs; Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims must ensure that the benefit-of-the-doubt rule in 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b) was properly applied during the claims process in order to satisfy 38 U.S.C. § 7261(b)(1), which directs the court to “take due account” of the Department of Veterans Affairs’ application of that rule.Featuring:James S. Burling, Vice President of Litigation, Pacific Legal FoundationJohn Masslon, Senior Litigation Counsel, Washington Legal FoundationMatthew Rice, Solicitor General, Tennessee Attorney General's OfficeZack Smith, Legal Fellow and Manager, Supreme Court and Appellate Advocacy Program, The Heritage Foundation(Moderator) Kirby T. West, Attorney, Institute of Justice

In this episode of "Arguendo: The Veterans Law Pod," hosts Amy Kretkowski and Amy Odom dissect two pivotal cases from the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims and the Federal Circuit. They explore the complexities of Frantzis v. Wilkie, discussing the removal of statutory language and its impact on the rights of veterans within the AMA framework, and delve into Hamilton v. McDonough, where the intricacies of the attorney work-product doctrine in veterans' benefits claims are scrutinized. This episode provides a deep dive into the legal arguments, judicial interpretations, and broader implications of these decisions. For more information, visit our websites at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠cck-law.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ and abkveteranslaw.com

Join hosts Amy Odom and Amy Kretkowski as they analyze important oral arguments and legal trends observed at the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims and the Federal Circuit. In this episode, they discuss two cases from the Veterans Court: Greenidge v. McDonough, and Spigner v. McDonough. They also briefly look at two Supreme Court (SCOTUS) cases: Rudisill v. McDonough, and Loper Bright Enterprises, Inc. v. Raimondo, Sec. of Comm. Join them as they offer listeners a glimpse into the challenges veterans face during the appeals process. For more information, visit our websites at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠cck-law.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ and abkveteranslaw.com

Join hosts Amy Odom and Amy Kretkowski as they delve into oral arguments and legal trends observed at the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims and the Federal Circuit. In this episode, they discuss three cases from the Veterans Court: Haskell v. McDonough, and Held v. McDonough. They offer listeners a glimpse into the challenges veterans face during the appeals process. For more information, visit our websites at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠cck-law.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ and abkveteranslaw.com

Join hosts Amy Odom and Amy Kretkowski for the début episode of “Arguendo: The Veterans Law Pod.” Amy and Amy delve into oral arguments and legal trends observed at the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims and the Federal Circuit. In this episode, they discuss three cases from the Veterans Court: Kernz v. McDonough, Ferko v. McDonough, and Bolds v. McDonough. They offer listeners a glimpse into the challenges veterans face during the appeals process. For more information, visit our websites at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠cck-law.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ and abkveteranslaw.com

CCK argued at the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims on behalf of a veteran client who was seeking entitlement to Total Disability based on Individual Unemployability, or TDIU. On this episode of Veterans Legal Lowdown, the CCK team reviews the veteran's case and discusses how CCK helped him successfully appeal the decision after he received a Board denial. Tune in to hear the full story. For more information, visit our website at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠cck-law.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Follow us on social media: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ - ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠http://bit.ly/CCKYTL⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Facebook⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ - ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠http://bit.ly/CCKFBL⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ - ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠http://bit.ly/CCKINL⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ - ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠http://bit.ly/CCKTL

Conley Monk Jr. came home to Hamden in 1970 after serving in the Vietnam War. His discharge was prompted by a PTSD-induced altercation in Okinawa, and categorized within the military as "other-than-honorable." Mr. Monk spent decades trying to access basic benefits like disability coverage, until his appeal in 2015 ultimately changed how these kinds of cases are heard by the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, now formally allowing class-action lawsuits. This hour, Mr. Monk joins us along with his representation at Yale Law School's Veterans Legal Services Clinic. We'll discuss the new lawsuit they've filed against the VA, alleging racial discrimination. Plus, a new report from the Connecticut Veterans Legal Center (CVLC) shows how racial disparities persist across military discharge status, and how this impedes veterans' access to benefits. Across four out of five military branches and roughly one million separation documents CVLC obtained, Black service members "were approximately 1.5 times as likely as white service members to receive an Other Than Honorable rather than Honorable discharge, and approximately twice as likely as white service members to receive a General discharge." While the VA has not responded to the suit directly, press secretary Terrence Hayes provided a written statement to Connecticut Public, saying that the agency is working to address "institutional racism" and to review policies. What resources are there for veterans who are trying to secure benefits where we live, despite what can be burdensome discharge documentation? GUESTS: Conley Monk Jr.: Vietnam Veteran; Founder, National Veterans Council for Legal Redress Michael Sullivan: Student Intern, Yale Law School's Veterans Legal Services Clinic Alden Pinkham: Connecticut Bar Association Singer Fellow, Connecticut Veterans Legal Center Chelsea Donaldson: Supervising Attorney of the Veterans Benefits Unit, Connecticut Veterans Legal Center Where We Live is available as a podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Google Podcasts, Stitcher, or wherever you get your podcasts. Subscribe and never miss an episode!Support the show: http://wnpr.org/donateSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Conley Monk Jr. came home to Hamden in 1970 after serving in the Vietnam War. His discharge was prompted by a PTSD-induced altercation in Okinawa, and categorized within the military as "other-than-honorable." Mr. Monk spent decades trying to access basic benefits like disability coverage, until his appeal in 2015 ultimately changed how these kinds of cases are heard by the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, now formally allowing class-action lawsuits. This hour, Mr. Monk joins us along with his representation at Yale Law School's Veterans Legal Services Clinic. We'll discuss the new lawsuit they've filed against the VA, alleging racial discrimination. Plus, a new report from the Connecticut Veterans Legal Center (CVLC) shows how racial disparities persist across military discharge status, and how this impedes veterans' access to benefits. Across four out of five military branches and roughly one million separation documents CVLC obtained, Black service members "were approximately 1.5 times as likely as white service members to receive an Other Than Honorable rather than Honorable discharge, and approximately twice as likely as white service members to receive a General discharge." While the VA has not responded to the suit directly, press secretary Terrence Hayes provided a written statement to Connecticut Public, saying that the agency is working to address "institutional racism" and to review policies. What resources are there for veterans who are trying to secure benefits where we live, despite what can be burdensome discharge documentation? GUESTS: Conley Monk Jr.: Vietnam Veteran; Founder, National Veterans Council for Legal Redress Michael Sullivan: Student Intern, Yale Law School's Veterans Legal Services Clinic Alden Pinkham: Connecticut Bar Association Singer Fellow, Connecticut Veterans Legal Center Chelsea Donaldson: Supervising Attorney of the Veterans Benefits Unit, Connecticut Veterans Legal Center Support the show: http://wnpr.org/donateSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

QUESTION PRESENTED:(1) Whether the rebuttable presumption of equitable tolling from Irwin v. Department of Veterans Affairs applies to the one-year statutory deadline in 38 U.S.C. § 5110(b)(1) for seeking retroactive disability benefits, and, if so, whether the government has rebutted that presumption; and (2) whether, if 38 U.S.C. § 5110(b)(1) is amenable to equitable tolling, this case should be remanded so the agency can consider the particular facts and circumstances in the first instance.Date    Proceedings and Orders (key to color coding)Sep 17 2021 | Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 21, 2021)Oct 01 2021 | Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 21, 2021 to November 22, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.Oct 04 2021 | Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including November 22, 2021.Oct 21 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of Military-Veterans Advocacy Inc. filed.Nov 09 2021 | Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 22, 2021 to December 22, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.Nov 10 2021 | Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including December 22, 2021.Dec 22 2021 | Brief of respondent Denis R. McDonough, Secretary of Veterans Affairs in opposition filed.Dec 30 2021 | Reply of petitioner Adolfo R. Arellano filed. (Distributed)Jan 05 2022 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/21/2022.Feb 11 2022 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/18/2022.Feb 22 2022 | Petition GRANTED.Mar 10 2022 | Motion of the parties for an extension of time to file the briefs on the merits filed.Mar 22 2022 | Motion of the parties to extend the time to file the briefs on the merits granted. The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including May 13, 2022. The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including July 18, 2022.Apr 19 2022 | Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner Adolfo R. Arellano.May 02 2022 | Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner GRANTED.May 13 2022 | Brief of petitioner Adolfo R. Arellano filed.May 19 2022 | Brief amici curiae of Disabled American Veterans and Lee Kirby filed.May 20 2022 | Brief amici curiae of Military-Veterans Advocacy Inc. and Jewish War Veterans of the United States of America, Inc. filed.May 20 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of Constitutional Accountability Center filed.May 20 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of Federal Circuit Bar Association filed.May 20 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of National Law School Veterans Clinic Consortium filed.May 20 2022 | Brief amici curiae of Edgewood Veterans, et al. filed.Jun 14 2022 | ARGUMENT SET FOR Tuesday, October, 4, 2022.Jun 22 2022 | Record requested from the Federal Circuit.Jul 06 2022 | The record from the U.S.C.A. Federal Circuit is electronic and located on Pacer.Jul 18 2022 | Brief of respondent McDonough, Denis, Secretary of Veterans Affairs filed.Jul 19 2022 | The record from the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, has been electronically filed.Jul 21 2022 | CIRCULATEDAug 17 2022 | Reply of petitioner Adolfo R. Arellano filed. (Distributed)

The Board of Veterans' Appeals is the appellate body of VA and can overrule a decision made by a VA Regional Office. Following an unfavorable Board decision, veterans have two options to appeal: submit a Supplemental Claim or appeal to the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Join the CCK team as we discuss how to appeal to the CAVC. Be sure to tune in for this important update! For more information, visit our website at cck-law.com Follow us on social media: YouTube - http://bit.ly/CCKYTL Facebook - http://bit.ly/CCKFBL Instagram - http://bit.ly/CCKINL Twitter - http://bit.ly/CCKTL

The military veteran community has lots of legal needs, including legal assistance in handling veterans' claims stemming from their service. These brave men and women often lack access to experienced advocates to help in this area, including the appellate process. In this episode, Todd Smith and Jody Sanders discuss veterans' claims and appeals with Chris Attig, a founding partner of Attig, Curran, Steel. Chris and their team are some of our nation's leading veterans' advocates and are well-versed in the process. Chris shares their experience and offers tips to practitioners who might have an interest in gaining appellate experience while helping one of the most underserved populations. Chris also discusses their military background and path into appellate law as well as their firm's focus on attorney well-being. Love the show? Subscribe, rate, review, and share!Here's How »A special thanks to our sponsors:Court Surety Bond AgencyThomson ReutersProudly presented by Butler Snow LLPJoin the Texas Appellate Law Podcast Community today:texapplawpod.comTwitterYouTube

QUESTION PRESENTED:Whether, when the Department of Veterans Affairs denies a veteran's claim for benefits in reliance on an agency interpretation that is later deemed invalid under the plain text of the statutory provisions in effect at the time of the denial, that is the kind of “clear and unmistakable error” that the veteran may invoke to challenge VA's decision.Date Proceedings and OrdersAug 13 2021 | Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due September 16, 2021)Aug 24 2021 | Motion to extend the time to file a response from September 16, 2021 to October 18, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.Aug 25 2021 | Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including October 18, 2021.Sep 15 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of Jeremy C. Doerre filed.Sep 16 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of Military-Veterans Advocacy filed.Oct 05 2021 | Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 18, 2021 to November 17, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.Oct 06 2021 | Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including November 17, 2021.Nov 08 2021 | Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 17, 2021 to December 8, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.Nov 09 2021 | Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including December 8, 2021.Dec 08 2021 | Brief of respondent Denis R. McDonough, Secretary of Veterans Affairs in opposition filed.Dec 20 2021 | Reply of petitioner Kevin R. George filed. (Distributed)Dec 22 2021 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/7/2022.Jan 10 2022 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/14/2022.Jan 14 2022 | Petition GRANTED.Jan 25 2022 | Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner Kevin R. George.Feb 22 2022 | Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner GRANTED.Feb 28 2022 | Brief of petitioner Kevin R. George filed.Mar 03 2022 | Amicus brief of Disabled American Veterans not accepted for filing. (March 03, 2022--Corrected version to be submitted)Mar 03 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of Disabled American Veterans (3/3/2022) filed.Mar 04 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of National Law School Veterans Clinic Consortium filed.Mar 07 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of Military-Veterans Advocacy and Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles filed.Mar 07 2022 | Brief amici curiae of Senators Ted Cruz and Mike Lee filed.Mar 07 2022 | Brief amici curiae of National Veterans Legal Services Program, et al. filed.Mar 07 2022 | Brief amici curiae of Swords to Plowshares and Vietnam Veterans of America filed.Mar 15 2022 | ARGUMENT SET FOR Tuesday, April 19, 2022.Mar 16 2022 | Record requested from the U.S.C.A. Federal Circuit.Mar 18 2022 | The record from the U.S.C.A. Federal Circuit is electronic and located on Pacer.Mar 23 2022 | CIRCULATEDMar 28 2022 | The record received from the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims has been electronically filed.Mar 30 2022 | Brief of Denis R. McDonough, Secretary of Veterans Affairs not accepted for filing. (April 01, 2022--Corrected brief and PDF to be submitted.)Mar 30 2022 | Brief of respondent Denis R. McDonough, Secretary of Veterans Affairs filed. (Distributed)Apr 08 2022 | Reply of petitioner Kevin R. George filed. (Distributed)Apr 19 2022 | Argued. For petitioner: Melanie L. Bostwick, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Anthony A. Yang, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C.★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

The Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, or the CAVC, is a federal court with jurisdiction over decisions made by the Board of Veterans' Appeals. Tune in as the CCK team reviews the entire CAVC process and timeline. We also discuss how much a CAVC appeal costs, the benefits of hiring an attorney, and how to appeal an unfavorable CAVC decision. Don't miss out on this informative episode! For more information, visit our website at cck-law.com Follow us on social media: YouTube - http://bit.ly/CCKYTL Facebook - http://bit.ly/CCKFBL Instagram - http://bit.ly/CCKINL Twitter - http://bit.ly/CCKTL

The Albany Law School Veterans' Pro Bono Project presents a discussion between Benjamin Pomerance and Judge Jaquith regarding the judge's path from Army Judge Advocate General Corps to a federal judge on the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims and recent developments in the field of veterans' law. Thank you to co-sponsor New York State Bar Association's Committee on Veterans. Pomerance and Jaquith will discuss the judge's background and experience in the military, veteran advocacy, and legal communities. The topic will then shift to new and developing rules in the realm of veterans' law and the seminal cases behind the development of these rules. Benjamin Pomerance, Esq. '13 - Deputy Director for Program Development at the New York State Division of Veterans Affairs https://www.albanylaw.edu/faculty/faculty-directory/benjamin-pomerance-esq-13 Hon. Grant C. Jaquith - Judge on the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grant_C._Jaquith

Eric Gang is the Managing Attorney and Founder of Gang & Associates, a law firm that serves veterans and their families across the country. With over 20 years of experience in law, Eric has litigated more than 1,000 appeals at the US Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, winning some of the largest VA awards on record.  Eric is also the Co-author of two books and has been published in The Federal Lawyer. He lectures for the State Bar Association and is a Faculty Member at Lawline.com, where he teaches continuing legal education in the area of veteran disability law. His most recent accolades include National Law Journal's 2021 Litigation Trailblazer Award and Lawdragon's 500 Leading Lawyers in America in 2022. In this episode… Many people return from war suffering PTSD, homelessness, and other physical and mental health issues. To make matters worse, veterans are often forced to fight the Department of Veterans Affairs for benefits. How are law firms working to help veterans receive the compensation they deserve?  Numerous veterans come to Eric Gang and his team with the most difficult cases — many of which have been on appeal for decades. One veteran had been turned away from various firms because they argued his case wasn't viable. The veteran suffered from schizophrenia and wasn't able to work after being discharged from the military at a young age. The Department of Veterans Affairs refused benefits, stating that his schizophrenia was a pre-service condition. Against all odds, Eric took on the challenge and ended up winning the case.   In this episode of The Guts and Glory Show, Chad Franzen sits down with Eric Gang, Managing Attorney and Founder of Gang & Associates, to talk about how Eric is working to create a more equitable future for veterans. Eric explains why he is so passionate about serving veterans, exposes the flaws in the Veterans Affairs system, and shares remarkable stories from his practice.

Veterans: Claims, Appeals, Health Care, Programs—American Legion Post 67—Commander Richard Spryrison 

The United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims is a national court of record, established under Article I of the Constitution of the United States. The Court has exclusive jurisdiction to provide judicial review of final decisions by the Board of Veterans' Appeals, an entity within the Department of Veterans Affairs. The CAVC has exclusive jurisdiction to review all decisions from the Board of Veterans Appeals (BVA). The US Court of Veterans Appeals views its jurisdiction very narrowly, at this time, and extends it only to "final BVA decisions". --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/vet2vet/support

This podcast will highlight the US Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims struggle with when to reverse the [BVA] We will argue that the CAVC should adopt this rule: Whenever a veteran highlights a reversible error in the BVA's decision, the CAVC must reverse and order the benefits to be awarded, absent a showing by the Secretary that a remand is necessary. This rule follows the clear intent of Congress and properly applies the benefit of the doubt rule. --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/vet2vet/support

To reach out to Alex D. Tremble you can contact him below and use #TheATshow. LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/alextremble/ YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/alextremble Instagram: https://instagram.com/alexdtremble Twitter: https://twitter.com/AlexDTremble Feds Protection Anthony F. Vergnetti is the President and Founder of Federal Employee Defense Services, Inc. (FEDS), located near Washington, D.C.  Since 2007, FEDS has provided professional liability insurance coverage to the government employee and contractor community.  Prior to founding FEDS, Mr. Vergnetti was a partner in the Washington, D.C. law firm Shaw Bransford Veilleux & Roth P.C. where he specialized in federal personnel and employment law, representing employees in disciplinary action cases, employment discrimination complaints, whistleblower and prohibited personnel practice cases, Inspector General (IG) and Internal Affairs investigations, security clearance issues (including federal contractors), and other employment matters in various forums, including the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB), the Office of Special Counsel (OSC), Department of Hearings and Appeals (DOHA), as well as the federal district and appellate courts. Mr. Vergnetti has also provided legal representation to small federal agencies on a multitude of personnel law matters. Mr. Vergnetti is a current co-host of FEDtalk, a weekly radio show on Fridays, 11:00 a.m. to 12 noon (Eastern Time), on WTOP's all-federal employee radio station, on line at Federal News Network and  locally in the Washington DC area on 1500AM. On FEDtalk, Mr. Vergnetti presents experts who discuss matters of importance to federal employees and retirees. Mr. Vergnetti also previously frequently appeared on Federal News Network's signature morning drive show—the Federal Drive with Mike Causey. Mr. Vergnetti is the author of the numerous articles and publications such as the 2002 INSPECTOR GENERAL AND OFFICE OF SPECIAL COUNSEL INVESTIGATIONS HANDBOOK (www.federalhandbooks.com) and has presented seminars to government executives and employees on a variety of federal personnel law matters at training programs sponsored by FDR Conferences, Inc. Prior to joining SBVR, Mr. Vergnetti was an attorney with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, Office of Chief Counsel (1997-2001) where he represented the Bureau in personnel matters (disciplinary and other adverse actions), and other employment/labor law matters before the various administrative tribunals (MSPB, EEOC, FLRA) and the Federal district or appellate courts. Mr. Vergnetti also worked as an Appellate Attorney for the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (1996) and served as a judicial law clerk for the Honorable Hart. T. Mankin, U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (1995). Mr. Vergnetti is also the current Executive Director of the OmniGov Training Institute, which is a non-profit corporation that provides training and guidance for government employees and agencies on a wide variety of human resource and personnel law issues. Mr. Vergnetti is also the President of TMS, a consulting firm specializing in association management for federal employee associations and organizations.  Mr. Vergnetti has B.A degree from Arizona State University (1992) and law degrees from Widener University School of Law (1995) and the Georgetown University Law Center (1999 -- Masters of Law in Labor/Employment Law) Prior to attending undergraduate and law schools, Mr. Vergnetti served on active duty in the United States Air Force (1985-1989). Mr. Vergnetti is a member of the Bar in Maryland and the District of Columbia and holds several surplus lines property and casualty insurance licenses. Brenda Wilson is the Director of Strategy and Business Development of Federal Employee and Contractor Programs at FEDS Protection, the leading provider of federal employee professional liability

This episode of the Next Lawyer Up podcast features Bart Stichman.  There has been a lot of discussion in our country over the last couple of decades about how we, as a nation, need to do more for our veterans.  To that end, I can’t imagine that there are many individuals who have done more for veterans, whether they know it or not, than attorney Bart Stichman.  Even with high-flying degrees from the University of Pennsylvania,  New York University School of Law and Georgetown University Law Center, Bart has kept a singular focus on doing public interest law for his life’s work.  Beyond that, he has focused his entire forty plus year legal career devoted to helping veterans get their benefits from the VA.  Bart is the co-founder and current executive director of the National Veterans Legal Services Program (NVLSP).  Bart’s litigation efforts through NVLSP have resulted in payment of more than six billion dollars in disability and healthcare benefits to hundreds of thousands of disabled veterans and their families.  Additionally, Bart helped organize and currently serves as a trainer for the Veterans Consortium Pro Bono Program, which has recruited and trained more than 2,000 volunteer attorneys over the last 25 years to represent those who have appealed to the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims without a representative. Bart is also a co-author of The Veterans Benefits Manual, a 2200 hundred page treatise published by Lexis.  This masterwork is a must-have for any attorney practicing in the area of veteran’s law.  I enjoyed getting to know Bart on this podcast and I think you will too.   

There are several types of accredited representatives who can help veterans with their cases before the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Many veterans benefit from the assistance of an accredited representative, but it can be difficult to find the right one. Tune in as we discuss the requirements for accreditation, how much a representative can legally charge, what questions to ask, and more. For more information, visit our website at cck-law.com Follow us on social media: YouTube - http://bit.ly/CCKYTL Facebook - http://bit.ly/CCKFBL Instagram - http://bit.ly/CCKINL Twitter - http://bit.ly/CCKTL

Judge Michael Allen speaks about his path to serving as one of nine judges on the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, the youngest federal court, created in 1988. Appeals of all benefits administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs are heard by the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Judge Allen speaks about the family members and teachers who mentored him and made a difference in his life. Hear his special stories of visiting the White House to interview for the seat on the bench before being confirmed by the Senate in August of 2017, when Chief Justice John Roberts swore him in and the unique impact a lawyer had in his parents’ lives. Judge Allen explains that the goal of a judge is much like that of a baseball umpire: to get it right. “Judge Michael Allen was nominated by the President of the United States in June 2017. He was confirmed by the United States Senate, and appointed a Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims in August 2017. United States District Judge Elizabeth Kovachevich of the Middle District of Florida administered the judicial oath to Judge Allen on August 11, 2017.For 16 years before his judicial appointment, Judge Allen was a tenured full professor of law at Stetson University College of Law in Gulfport, Florida. He was also the director of Stetson's Veterans Law Institute, and he spent four years as the College of Law's associate dean. Judge Allen also served as a visiting professor of law at the University of Illinois College of Law. Before entering teaching, Judge Allen practiced law for nine years in the litigation department of the Boston-based international law firm Ropes & Gray.Judge Allen graduated summa cum laude from the University of Rochester earning bachelor's degrees in American history and political science. He received his juris doctor from Columbia Law School, where he was a Harlan Fiske Stone Scholar during his final two years.As a professor, Judge Allen taught courses in constitutional law, civil procedure, federal courts, remedies, and veterans benefits law. He has been a prolific author, cowriting two books and more than 25 articles and essays. Judge Allen also received numerous awards for his scholarship and teaching including the Stetson University Award for Excellence in Scholarship, the Brown-Dickerson Award for Excellence in Scholarship, the Stetson University Award for Excellence in Teaching, and the Stetson University Award for Excellence in Professionalism and Career Development. He also received the Stetson's Golden Apple Award for teaching and was twice named the best all-around professor.Judge Allen was also a frequent speaker at community and professional groups while in legal education. Among his speaking engagements were featured roles at the judicial conferences of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims and the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In addition, Judge Allen testified before the Veterans' Affairs Committees of both the United States Senate and the United States House of Representatives.Before taking the bench, Judge Allen was active in professional associations. He served on the Board of Trustees of the Southeastern Association of Law Schools and was the Chair of the American Association of Law Schools' sections on Remedies and New Law Teachers. He is also active in his synagogue where, along with his wife, he received the Shofar Award for community service.” (US Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims). United States Court of Appeals for Veteran ClaimsBob Feller Act of Valor Award FoundationHosts: Tyler Buchholz and Colin KirkEditor: Jack MetcalfeSupport the show (https://customcoinholders.com/product/walk-of-heroes/)

Veterans who received emergency medical treatment at non-VA facilities recently achieved a victory in the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Now the VA last week started sending corrective notices to a million vets that weren't reimbursed. Here with details, the executive director of the National Veterans Legal Services Program, Bart Stichman.

In this episode, Attorney Chris Lavin will share his personal life with our listeners about growing up in Dallas Texas and migrating here to Lebanon. Since graduating from the University of Dayton College of Law in 1998, Attorney Lavin has focused his practice in the area of Elder Law serving the needs of senior citizens, including but not limited to, a dedication to the areas of estate planning, retirement planning and asset protection with a specific concentration towards nursing home qualification, comprehensive use of trusts, wills, probate issues and durable powers of attorney. Attorney Lavin previously worked for Pro Seniors, Inc. in Cincinnati, where he assisted seniors with diverse Elder Law issues, including nursing home planning. Attorney Lavin now serves as the managing partner of the Lavin Law Group LLC, which was founded on the idea that estate planning is for everyone, and that an educated client will make the best decision for themselves and their families. We all have options. In addition to his law degree, Attorney Lavin holds a Bachelor of Arts and a Bachelor of Science degree from Xavier University. Attorney Lavin is licensed to practice law in the State of Ohio as well as the State of Kentucky and has been admitted to practice before the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. He is a member of the Ohio State Bar Association, the Cincinnati Bar Association, the Kentucky Bar Association, the National Academy of Elder Law Attorneys and Wealth Counsel. He also serves on the Elder Law Committee of the Cincinnati Bar Association. Attorney Lavin is a frequent lecturer for various professional groups on legal issues affecting seniors including the Warren County Alzheimer’s Association, the Ohio Parkinson’s Association, The Dayton Chapter of the Ohio Tax Society, and the Wright-Patterson AFB Retiree Support Squadron. Attorney Lavin has also taught Medicaid to attorneys and other professionals for the National Business Institute and co-authored 101 Questions about Living Estate Planning and Living Trusts. https://www.lavin-elderlaw.com/Support the show (http://www.paypal.com/donate/?token=CKk27_INNWREPcK7eFolWWbIT6OS78fh5K1BIuosF0aKBcPRvjPhdWkL-53k2cESLTKajW&country.x=US&locale.x=US)

Alex Graham also known as the one and only ASKNOD, brings his special style of humor to the show as he discusses the newly proposed Agent Orange Presumptive diseases like Hypertension, Parkinsons like Symptoms and Bladder Cancer. Join us for this one.

Dr Craig Bash is an Air Force Veteran. He has been doing Veteran's evaluations for well over 30 years. His specialty is Neuroradiology. Dr Bash's website is http://www.veteransmedadvisor.com. His knowledge of the VA claims process as it relates to an individuals disablity is top tier.  Join us.

We will be discussing the HISA Grant and other VA claims issues.  The HISA grant is the Home Improvement and Structural Alterations Grant. https://www.prosthetics.va.gov/psas/hisa2.asp This grant pays up to $6800.00 directly to veterans for home improvements to make a home more accessible for certain disabilities.  We will also talk about the VA claims process. 

Our guest speaker will be the one and only Alex Graham, Alex or ASKNOD a he is so well known as brings his vast VA knowledge and his constant wit to the show. Alex is the expert on Hep C and other issues that has afforded him the ability to become a Certified VA claims agent. He has helped a lot of Veterans with their claims by direct representation, His contributions to Hadit.com and through his own website ASKNOD.ORG. Join us for this show as Alex passes his knowledge to the listeners.

What is the Deep Issue in the Case? The  Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims shall have exclusive jurisdiction to review BVA decisions; however, the Court may not review the schedule of ratings for disabilities adopted under 38 USC 1155 – or any action of the Secretary in adopting or revising that schedule. 38 U.S.C. §7252(a)(b).   The […] The post PRECEDENTIAL CAVC CASE ALERT: Marcelino v. Shulkin (16-2959)(Service Connection of Obesity) appeared first on Attig Curran Steel, PLLC.

Travis is accredited by the Department of Veterans Affairs to represent veterans in veterans benefit claims and represents veterans at the Regional Office, the Board of Veterans Appeals, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims.

• Episode 011: Interview of David Lowenstein, a former Senior Appellate Attorney at the Veterans Affairs General Counsel's office. David now uses his past experience to represent veterans with the claims process and with their Appeals at the VA and US Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. David will give us tips on what you need to know if you are going through the VA process. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/ferah-ozbek/message

Naavets.org vision is to serve as a comprehensive nonprofit organization that values the honorable and selfless service of our nation's service members and disabled veterans.

Please join your host SUSAN KNOWLES as she welcomes guest DENISE CALDON SORKNESS to STAND FOR TRUTH RADIO on Monday, February 6, 2017 at 6pmPT/9pmET.DENISE SORKNESS is the author of "STALL, DENY AND HOPE THEY DIE: The VA's Unwritten Policy."We will be discussing her powerful story regarding one woman's quest to see justice served for her dying veteran husband and the children he left behind.Hear the struggles Sorkness has faced as she’s fought the Veterans Administration, first through their internal channels and then through the U.S. Court of Appeals of Veterans Claims.“I used to pray for somebody to speak out, stand up and voice the concerns of so many Veterans and their families like ours. Then I realized…..I am somebody.” -derived from quote by Lily Tomlin, ActorThe dream of every writer is to have their heart type the words for them. As the voice of so many Veterans and their families, my heart would not stop writing until our family’s VA story was told.In January 1987, while we were building our dream home in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, our lives, as we knew it and dreamed of for many years, suddenly disappeared ……..forever. I will continue to encourage all Veterans and their families – who each have their own story – to live each day remembering…through relentless faith, love and perseverance, your family, just like ours today, will, one day, know, “The Impossible Dream” is, indeed, “Possible.” GOD Bless the U.S.A., GOD Bless you!

Please join your host SUSAN KNOWLES as she welcomes guest DENISE CALDON SORKNESS to STAND FOR TRUTH RADIO on Monday, February 6, 2017 at 6pmPT/9pmET.DENISE SORKNESS is the author of "STALL, DENY AND HOPE THEY DIE: The VA's Unwritten Policy."We will be discussing her powerful story regarding one woman's quest to see justice served for her dying veteran husband and the children he left behind.Hear the struggles Sorkness has faced as she’s fought the Veterans Administration, first through their internal channels and then through the U.S. Court of Appeals of Veterans Claims.“I used to pray for somebody to speak out, stand up and voice the concerns of so many Veterans and their families like ours. Then I realized…..I am somebody.” -derived from quote by Lily Tomlin, ActorThe dream of every writer is to have their heart type the words for them. As the voice of so many Veterans and their families, my heart would not stop writing until our family’s VA story was told.In January 1987, while we were building our dream home in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, our lives, as we knew it and dreamed of for many years, suddenly disappeared ……..forever. I will continue to encourage all Veterans and their families – who each have their own story – to live each day remembering…through relentless faith, love and perseverance, your family, just like ours today, will, one day, know, “The Impossible Dream” is, indeed, “Possible.” GOD Bless the U.S.A., GOD Bless you!

Robert P. Walsh, attorney, specializes in Veteran's Disability Law and Social Security Disability Law. Experience November 1994 - Present Private practice, Battle Creek, Michigan. Private practice concentrating in the area of disability law, to include Social Security disability claims and veterans benefits claims and appeals before the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. Representation of veterans includes the Regional Office, Board of Veterans Appeals, U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. January 2008 - Present Adjunct Clinical Professor, Veterans Law Clinic, University of Detroit Mercy School of Law. Ham Radio: WA8MOA since 1964; VK9ZR '78; VK0JS '83; HZ1AB 80-86; 9K2ZR 92-94. Specialties:Veterans and Social Security Disability Law.