We do not normally look at Federal Circuit decisions unless they involve Vets. This one is like the iceberg that the Titanic struck- and with similar results for the BVA and the CAVC.

Clara Sue Padgett took over her husband’s long and tortuous case after he succumbed during its pendancy. We can all relate to this. The phrase “deny until they die” rises in the back of my throat, but I will resist it.

Barney O. Padgett was a survivor of the “Big One”. He was awarded SC for a bum knee in 1945. Fast forward to 1993 and a filing for a right hip injury related to service. He did it right complete with two nexi from accredited doctors no less. The RO showed him the door. This started a very long ping pong game with his claim. The BVA would remand on some minor technicality and the RO would deny yet again. And so on and on. Finally, in 1999 the ping pong game moved to the Court where the same process ensued. Starting in 2001, it went back down to the BVA and back up to the Court and yet again to the BVA.

Barney and the VASEC asked the Court for an en banc review which they accepted in 2004. In April of 2005 (12 years after this all began) the en banc Court reversed the BVA and found in Barney’s favor. As usual, this began another jaunt down to the BVA and thus to the RO for a rating Perhaps this was too much for old Barney’s heart because he set sail on his new life adventure in November of that year. I don’t blame him.

This didn’t set well with the VASEC. He promptly petitioned the Court to recall the en banc decision as moot in light of Barney’s recent departure. Clara Sue didn’t cotton to this as she had a lot of law dog time invested. Moreover there was a lot owing due to the VA’s fighting tooth and nail with her for over a decade. The Court agreed with VASEC and bingo- bye bye to Clara Sue’s petition to be substituted in the claims process. Clara armored up and headed up to the Fed. Cir. and won! So, Back down to the Court where it was handed back to the BVA where it was handed back to the RO(again).

Clara was getting her sea legs now and concurrently filed for accrued benefits on Barney’s claim. VA denied and that began another legal brouhaha. First the RO denied, then fell on their sword and admitted CUE in old Barney’s hip claim. The Court reinstated the en banc decision in 2008 and all seemed fine in Mudville. Unfortunately, the VASEC just couldn’t leave well enough alone. One would think with his track record recently against aggrieved war widows, he would have tucked his tail between his legs and quietly exited the building.

But noooooo! He couldn’t walk away after being dissed by an old woman. She filed an EAJA claim for $87+ K for all this work as rightfully she should have. After all, she had won this hands down and the Fed. Cir. concurred. The VASEC got rather purple in the face and said no way- Barney’s dead and this has to end. The Court decided she was only partially entitled to the funds due – but only up to and ending upon Barney’s ending. That amounted to about $27K and left a substantial sum still due and payable for work done after he passed to obtain a judgment for monies owed from before he passed. When you get rid of all the sua spontes and nunc pro tuncs and turn this into  DickandJanespeak, it  suddenly makes perfect sense. It did to Clara at any rate.

So, guess what ? Back to the Fed. Circuit yet again to get what should never have been a bone of contention. The Feds agreed and not only agreed, but reversed the CAVC and sent them an accelerated payment plan- Pay Up!

What Clara Sue has accomplished for us is monumental. This is a piece of work 18 years in the making of legal wrangling to obtain that which should have been granted long ago. How many trees did they have to cut down to print all this? Why? Law is cut and dried. It sometimes takes some legal reasoning to discern the trees for the forest but this is a classic example of “we’ll see it when we believe it” rather than the obverse. Thank you Clara Sue from all of who will benefit from your dogged determination to see justice accomplished. If this isn’t a teaching moment of how far VA will go to deny one their due, I don’t know that I can supply a more illustrative example.

http://www.veteranslawlibrary.com/files/Fed_Cir_Cases/2011/Padgett_10-7081.pdf

Print this up and take a nice glass of iced tea out to the porch with you. This will warm your heart.