While we here at Asknod rarely involve ourselves in VA Policy, we are starting to observe a sentiment emanating down from the Court to the BVA, and, by extension, its minion, the AOJ.

The Court is a deliberative body and weighs the law in its determination of our claims. Very simply, if the Board has met its legal obligations, the ruling is affirmed. When the Secretary’s position is predicated on defective reasoning and improper legal interpretations, he is overruled and the claim is remanded down for a proper decision based on the Court’s identification of the discrepancy. Occasionally the Court will discover a whole new vein of rights that apply to the Vet that have been overlooked for decades. This is cutting edge precedence. If the Secretary’s position is too far off base, the Court will reverse the offending decision and issue a decision to the contrary in no uncertain terms. This is usually reserved for cases where precedence has existed for a decade or more and the Secretary boldly goes where no VASEC has gone before.

And then there is the power of the Court to order certain things to happen. A remand is a form of a Court order to the BVA to reconsider, remand to the AOJ or write a new decision dictated by the Court. One does not diss the Court. That’s simply bad form. One ignores the dictates of the Court at his own peril. Similarly, reinterpreting the Court’s order to expeditiously accomplish something with a “I’ll get to it when I get to it” attitude will create ill will between one and the Court.

The Court order we are examining here sets no legal precedence. What it does do is extraordinary, though. The Court, in a panel order, has just announced that it is fed up with the continuing shenanigans of our current Secretary and his two immediate predecessors. Finding him in contempt of court for not one, but three egregious errors, they have chosen to sanction him with a monetary fine. That will, of course, simply be deducted from the next claimant’s compensation package. No physical or financial opprobrium will befall the VASEC, but the ignominy of  the action will sting for quite some time. It’s akin to Willie Clinton’s impeachment. No more cigars and blue dresses.  More importantly, its the Court’s way of recognizing a pattern of misbehavior and finally putting their collective foot down.

The Court awarded $11,715.49 to the petitioner, Cleveland D. Harvey in costs and attorney fees. Additionally, they hired some of their Law Dog friends in to observe the proceedings and boo at the proper moment. This  group is called  the Amicus Curiae or the “Friends of the Court” in our stilted Dick and Jane speak. They were awarded $7,879.31 because, hey, they showed up every day and everyone knows Tanqueray martinis and lunch in downtown D.C. are not cheap.

So, everyone got what they wanted except Gen. Revered Leader (USA, retired). Mr. Harvey got closure, but no extra dollars. Mr. Harvey’s attorney got way less than he asked for, but gets to bask in the glory of 15 minutes or more of Warholian fame in the legal world.  The Veteran we cannot introduce you to, as we know not his name, is the one who will end up screwed out of time and money due to his claim being put on hold to clean up this foreseeable mess.

Meet one very upset pissed off Panel of Judges (per curiam):

http://www.uscourts.cavc.gov/documents/Harvey_10-1284_published_opinion_1-25-2011.pdf

Funny thing was, VA didn’t owe him any more money. They just strung him out and didn’t tell him that. Well, they do now.