Hamill v. Collins: VA Can No Longer Deny a Claim Without Telling You

CCK Law: Our Vital Role in Veterans Law

A February 2026 federal court ruling changed how the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) informs veterans of decisions regarding their disability claims, and it could affect thousands of pending and past cases.

In Hamill v. Collins, No. 24-1543 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 4, 2026), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled that VA can no longer silently decide a veteran’s claim without informing the veteran. Now, under the Appeals Modernization Act (AMA), if VA did not explicitly address a claim in its decision, that claim was never decided, and may still be pending.

Here is what the case decided and what it means for veterans:

• The implicit denial doctrine is eliminated for AMA claims. VA must now explicitly identify every issue it is deciding.
• Claims decided on or after February 19, 2019, are generally subject to this ruling.
• Veterans who were never told a claim was denied may have grounds to argue that claim is still pending.
• This ruling does not apply to the legacy appeals system — only to claims under the AMA.

What Is the VA Implicit Denial Doctrine?

The implicit denial doctrine was a court-created rule under which VA could be considered to have denied a claim without expressly saying so. If VA decided one claim, a related claim could also be deemed denied by implication, even if the decision notice contained no specific discussion of that claim.

For example:

• Say a veteran files claims for PTSD and Total Disability Based on Individual Unemployability (TDIU).
• In response, VA issues a decision rating the veteran’s PTSD, but says nothing about TDIU.
• Under the implicit denial doctrine, VA could later argue the TDIU claim was implicitly denied since there was no mention of it in the PTSD decision. This had the side effect of starting the timer on the veteran’s appeal window for TDIU, without the veteran ever knowing.

As the Federal Circuit quoted in Adams v. Shinseki, 568 F.3d 956 (Fed. Cir. 2009), the implicit denial doctrine applied when a VA decision “discusses a claim in terms sufficient to put the claimant on notice that it was being considered and rejected, even if the formal adjudicative language does not specifically deny that claim.” The key question was whether a “reasonable person” would understand that one decision also disposed of another.

This doctrine was especially harmful to veterans pursuing claims for Total Disability Based on Individual Unemployability (TDIU). TDIU claims are often raised by evidence rather than a formal application, making it easy for VA to overlook.

What Happened in Hamill v. Collins?

David Hamill is a Marine veteran who was discharged in 2013 under “Other Than Honorable” conditions. That discharge status initially barred him from receiving most VA disability benefits under 38 U.S.C. § 5303(a) and 38 C.F.R. § 3.12(c)(6).

Hamill filed for disability compensation three times for PTSD, back pain, and other conditions — once in 2014, and then again in 2017 and 2021. His initial claim was denied on the basis of his discharge status, a determination that Hamill attempted to reopen with his subsequent claims filed in 2017 and 2021.

In 2021, VA granted Hamill service connection for PTSD, but made no mention of his discharge status in its decision notice. The next year, Hamill’s attorney sent a letter to VA asking for it to make an explicit decision regarding Hamill’s discharge status.

The case rose all the way to the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC), which dismissed the case on the basis that VA’s 2021 decision “implicitly denied” Hamill’s request to reopen his character of discharge determination.

Finally, Hamill appealed to the Federal Circuit, arguing that requirements established by the Appeals Modernization Act (AMA) overruled the implicit denial doctrine. The Federal Circuit agreed with Hamill, eliminating the implicit denial doctrine and remanding Hamill’s case back down to the CAVC for further proceedings.

How Did Hamill v. Collins Affect the Implicit Denial Doctrine?

The Federal Circuit unanimously agreed with Hamill, holding that under the AMA, VA can no longer implicitly deny a veteran’s claim. This was a case of first impression — no court had previously decided whether the implicit denial doctrine survived the AMA.

The ruling generally applies to all claims for which VA issued a decision on or after February 19, 2019. It does not affect claims under the pre-AMA legacy system.

Why Did the AMA Change Things?

The 2017 Appeals Modernization Act (AMA) overhauled VA’s appeals process and created a new set of review options, allowing veterans to choose from three new appeal lanes: Higher-Level Review, Supplemental Claim, or direct appeals to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (BVA).

Because the AMA gives veterans multiple review paths, Congress established additional standards surrounding what information VA must include in any decision notice sent to a veteran going forward.

This information now includes:

• Identification of the issues adjudicated
• A summary of the evidence considered
• A summary of applicable laws and regulations
• Identification of findings favorable to the veteran
• If a claim is denied: identification of the elements not satisfied
• An explanation of how to obtain the evidence used
• If applicable: identification of what criteria must be met to grant service connection or a higher rating

The logic behind this is that, if a veteran’s claim is denied, they will not be able to choose the proper appeal option for their claim unless they are explicitly informed about which aspects of their claim were denied.

In Hamill v. Collins, the court found that the implicit denial doctrine directly conflicts with Congress’ clear directive for explicit, detailed notice under the AMA. The AMA’s new notice requirements, the court reasoned, make no room for a rule that allows VA to silently decide a claim.

In short, as the Federal Circuit stated in Hamill: “No veteran can appeal a decision he does not understand to have been made.” Hamill v. Collins, No. 24-1543 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 4, 2026).

What Does Hamill v. Collins Mean for Veterans?

This ruling impacts veterans whose claims may have been overlooked or ignored in a VA decision issued under the AMA. Here is how it may affect you:

• Your claim may still be pending—If VA issued a decision on or after February 19, 2019, and never mentioned one of your claims, that claim was likely not decided. Under Hamill, it may still be an open, unadjudicated VA claim.
• Your appeal window may not have started—Under the old doctrine, VA could argue your deadline to appeal began when the implicit denial occurred. Under Hamill, there is no implicit denial under the AMA, which means the clock may not have started on claims VA never addressed.
• Earlier effective dates may be possible—If VA improperly overlooked a claim, the effective date for any benefits ultimately awarded could go back to the date of your original claim.
• This is especially relevant to TDIU—Because TDIU claims are often raised by evidence in the file rather than a formal application, they were frequently overlooked by VA. Hamill gives veterans a stronger argument that those claims were never actually denied.
• This applies to AMA claims only—If your claim was decided under the legacy appeals system — meaning VA issued its decision before February 19, 2019 — the implicit denial doctrine may still apply to your case.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the Appeals Modernization Act?

The Appeals Modernization Act (AMA) is a 2017 federal law that restructured how veterans appeal VA decisions. It replaced the old single-track legacy system with multiple review options, including:

• Higher-Level Review
• Supplemental Claims
• Notice of Disagreement (opening three Board of Veterans’ Appeals (BVA) dockets)

The AMA generally applies to VA decisions issued on or after February 19, 2019, though there may be exceptions in certain cases.

Does Hamill v. Collins apply to my older claims?

No, typically not if your claim was decided before February 19, 2019. The ruling applies only to claims decided under the AMA, which came into effect on that date.

What should I do if VA never addressed one of my AMA claims?

You may petition VA to adjudicate the unanswered issue or consult with a VA-accredited representative or attorney about your options. Typically, veterans should not wait, as deadlines for pursuing review options under the AMA are strict.

What is TDIU, and why is Hamill especially relevant to TDIU claims?

TDIU allows VA to compensate a veteran at the 100 percent rate if service-connected disabilities prevent the veteran from securing substantially gainful employment.

TDIU claims are frequently raised by the evidence in a veteran’s file rather than by a formal application, which made them more vulnerable to being silently overlooked under the old implicit denial rule.