CCK Wins Decision At Cavc Clarifying Board’s Duties In Adjudicating Veterans’ Entitlement To TDIU
On May 20, 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims issued a precedential decision that clarifies the Board’s duties in adjudicating veterans’ entitlement to total disability based on individual unemployability (TDIU). Ortiz-Valles v. McDonald, No. 14-2540, — Vet.App —, (May 20, 2016).
The Board denied the Veteran entitlement to TDIU because it found his service-connected disabilities did not prevent him from securing or following a substantially gainful occupation. Medical opinions indicated that the Veteran could perform some work but only on a part-time sedentary basis with work restrictions or accommodations.
On appeal, CCK argued that the Board erred when it did not consider whether the Veteran was only capable of marginal employment. Because VA regulations instruct that marginal work is not substantially gainful, a veteran whose service-connected disabilities prevent him from performing work that is more than marginal should be entitled to TDIU.
After considering the parties briefs and hearing oral argument from CCK’s Barbara Cook, as well as VA counsel, the Court held that “when the facts of the case reasonably raise the issue of whether the veteran’s ability to work might be limited to marginal employment,” the Board must “explain why the evidence does not demonstrate that the Veteran is incapable of more than marginal employment.” Slip Op. at 7
Significantly, a veteran does not need to be employed before the Board is required to consider whether he or she is only capable of marginal employment: “It is clear that the language of § 4.16(a) focuses on a veteran’s capabilities and not his current employment status.” Id. at 7.
The Court also held that the terms in the regulation: “substantially gainful occupation” and “substantially gainful employment” were synonymous. Id. at 6. Although the regulation does not define the term “substantially gainful occupation,” the Court encouraged VA to do so. Id. at 8-9.
- CCK Argues Against Board Denial for Increased Rating for PTSD
- CCK Argues that Board Denied Sleep Apnea Based on Inadequate Exam
- Court holds the Board must consider applicable VA Fast Letter
- Board Failed to Fully Account for Veteran’s Work History in TDIU Denial
- CCK Successfully Argues Against Board Decision Denying Compensable Rating for Costochondritis
- How Exactly Does RAMP Work for Veterans’ Disability Appeals?
- Can a Veteran Work While Receiving VA Disability?
- What is the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (BVA)?
- As a Veteran, How Much Will My Appeal of a Board Denial to the Court Cost?
- What is the Process in a Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) or Veterans Court Appeal?
- Monk v. Wilkie: Class Actions at the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC)
- CCK Court Win for Gulf War Veterans: Precedential Decision
- Do You NEED That Board Hearing
- The Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC)
- The Board of Veterans’ Appeals Explained
Share this Post