LEGAL ISSUES Paralyzed Veterans of America advances its mission inside and outside of the courtroom. Our attorneys work to educate the public on veteran claims issues and connect attorneys with veterans law resources. | ||
Paralyzed Veterans of America's (Paralyzed Veterans) attorneys have litigated hundreds of cases on behalf of members and other veterans, helping them receive the benefits they have earned. When veterans are denied benefits by Board of Veterans’ Appeals, they have a right to appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims and then to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Our professional staff represents claimants in these courts and tracks legal issues that matter to veterans.
Paralyzed Veterans' CasesParalyzed Veterans’ attorneys recently secured settlement agreements in the following cases: The first settlement was in Palaske v. Mansfield. Mr. Palaske is a World War II hero who flew more than 50 combat missions. Michael Horan, Paralyzed Veterans Deputy General Counsel, convinced VA that there was an error in a 1946 decision, and VA agreed to award more than 50 years of retroactive compensation. The second settlement was in Bernstein v. Mansfield. Mrs. Bernstein is the wife of World War II veteran Frank Bernstein, who died in 1980 from complications from his service-connected diseases. Paralyzed Veterans Assistant General Counsel Jennifer Zajac demonstrated that VA should have granted Mrs. Bernstein surviving spouse benefits at an earlier date, which will result in approximately 13 years of retroactive Disability and Indemnity Compensation benefits to Mrs. Bernstein.
Hot TopicsCourt of Appeals for Veterans Claims In Bowles, the petitioner was attempting to appeal the denial of a writ of habeas corpus to the Sixth Circuit, through the benefit of 28 U.S.C.A. § 2107(c) (West 2002), which has a specific, limited time period for filing. A judge gave him a deadline that was longer than the statute’s time period, and he filed his petition within the period allowed by the judge but two days later that the period stated in the statute. Finding that the statute’s filing deadlines were mandatory, the Supreme Court held that the Sixth Circuit could not equitably toll the deadline and the filing was therefore late. The Supreme Court also expressly overruled an earlier case that allowed a late filing. Paralyzed Veterans submitted a brief as amicus curiae on behalf of Mr. Henderson, arguing that the Supreme Court’s decision has no application to the CAVC’s equitable tolling case law, which is premised on the Supreme Court’s decision in Irwin v. Department of Veterans Affairs, a case which was not mentioned or overruled in the Bowles decision. Read Paralyzed Veteran’s amicus curiae brief. Federal Circuit Read the Federal Circuit’s decision in Haas. Attorney Representation VA's Claims Backlog Read Paralyzed Veterans' comments.
Other Issues to WatchInteresting issues are on appeal to the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims:
PublicationsSOAR, the Service Officers Appeals Report, is a quarterly newsletter providing information on cases at the Board of Veterans' Appeals, Veterans Court, and Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit; opinions and rulemaking of the Department of Veterans Affairs; judicial review; and other issues of concern to Paralyzed Veterans service officers. |