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.
- Court Relies on Saunders to Remand the Board Decision Denying Service Connection for Veteran’s Back Condition
- CCK Court win will help many veterans obtain more compensation
- Court Finds Board Deviated from Manual Guidance in Denial related to Herbicide Exposure in Thailand
- CCK argues that Board overlooked evidence in denial of multiple Persian Gulf War issues
- BVA errs in denial, Court finds VA examiner failed to opine on aggravation
- I Received an Unfavorable Board Decision; What Should I Do?
- 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?
- Can a Veteran Work While Receiving VA Disability?
- Fort McClellan Toxic Exposure Court Win
- Monk v. Wilkie: Class Actions at the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC)
- CCK Court Win: Precedential Decision on VA Unemployability
- CCK Court Wins: Agent Orange & Gulf War Illness
- CCK Court Win for Gulf War Veterans: Precedential Decision
Share this Post