Browse cases by category
- Attorneys & Legal Services
- Bankruptcy
- Civil Procedure & Administrative Law
- Civil Rights
- Consumer
- Criminal
- Disability
- Economic Development
- Education
- Elections
- Employment
- Environmental Justice
- Evidence
- Family Law
- Food Programs
- Government and Governmental Services
- Guardianship & Conservatorship
- Health
- Housing
- Immigration
- Juveniles
- License (Auto & Others)
- Mental Health
- Migrants
- Native Americans
- Other
- Prisons
- Public Utilities & Energy
- Rural Issues
- Senior Citizens
- Social Security & SSI
- Taxation
- Torts
- Unemployment Compensation & Unemployment Insurance
- Veterans & Military
- Welfare
- Wills & Estates
- Workforce Development
Cook v. Principi
No. 00-7171 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 20, 2002) ; Clearinghouse Number: 55082
Description
Courts May Not Craft Exceptions to Rule of Finality of VA Decisions, Federal Circuit Says
Abstract
The Federal Circuit held that courts had no authority to craft
exceptions to the rule of finality applicable to decisions of the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). In 1952 the Veterans
Administration’s regional office denied claimant-appellant
veteran’s service-connected benefits claim. Veteran did not
appeal. In 1989 the Board of Veterans Appeals, reopening his claim,
again denied service connection, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for
Veterans Claims reversed the latter decision, and the regional
office made an award. Veteran appealed, contending that the
effective date of the award should have been the original filing
date and that the regional office’s 1952 decision contained
“clear and unmistakable error” because it failed to
give him a proper medical examination and thus was nonfinal. The
board rejected the appeal, and the Veterans Court and a Federal
Circuit panel affirmed. In en banc review, the Federal
Circuit, noting that the statutory scheme provided for only two
exceptions to the rule of finality—presentation of new and
material evidence and clear and unmistakable error—and
concluding that Congress did not intend to allow additional
exceptions, ruled that a breach of the duty to assist the veteran
did not vitiate the finality of a regional office decision and
overruled Hayre v. West, 188 F.3d 1327 (Fed. Cir. 1999),
to the extent that it created an additional exception to the rule
of finality by reason of “grave procedural error.”
Concluding that to constitute clear and unmistakable error a
regional office’s decision must be outcome-determinative and
apparent from the evidence of record at the time of the original
decision, the court ruled that VA’s failure to assist a
veteran could not meet this standard.
