7 results for 'judge:"Toth"'.
J. Toth finds the Board of Veterans Appeals failed to determine whether separate evaluations for the Army veteran's paralysis, neuritis and neuralgia are permissible. The veteran is service connected for paralysis of a nerve as a residual of his in-service hernia repair and says the board failed to address reasonably raised issues of separate ratings citing the prohibition against "pyramiding" of benefits. Though separate ratings for all three conditions are prohibited by the rule against pyramiding, it is premature to consider the role of that prohibition. The record itself raises the issue and the board must consider the veteran's entitlement to separate ratings. Vacated.
Court: Court Of Appeals For Veterans Claims, Judge: Toth , Filed On: July 26, 2024, Case #: 22-6609, Categories: Health Care, Veterans
J. Toth finds the Board of Veterans Appeals properly excluded the Air Force veteran's right leg radiculopathy as part of her claim for a higher spine disability rating. The veteran filed a notice of disagreement as to a regional office decision assigning a noncompensable rating for her spine disability. The veteran later began experiencing radiculopathy in both legs and the regional office assigned a higher rating for the spine, granted service connection for the radiculopathy, and assigned separate ratings and effective dates for each condition. The veteran did not file a notice of disagreement and the original spine rating issue was returned to the board. She seeks an earlier effective date for radiculopathy based on its relationship to the spine issue. The separate issues are not considered the same for appellate purposes. Affirmed.
Court: Court Of Appeals For Veterans Claims, Judge: Toth, Filed On: July 23, 2024, Case #: 21-6249, Categories: Health Care, Veterans
J. Toth denies the veteran's Equal Access to Justice Act request for attorney fees and expenses. The VA denied the veteran's motion to revise his 10% rating for PTSD and the veteran applied for EAJA fees and expenses resulting from the ensuing litigation. The veteran did not receive a remand from the board and has not shown he is a prevailing party, as necessary for the EAJA motion.
Court: Court Of Appeals For Veterans Claims, Judge: Toth , Filed On: May 31, 2024, Case #: 20-7820(E), Categories: Veterans, Due Process, Attorney Fees
J. Toth finds the Board of Veterans Appeals improperly refused to consider the Navy veteran's notice of disagreement and request for extension. The board denied the veteran's claim for heart disability compensation 20 years after it was made. The veteran had filed the disagreement 2 weeks after the deadline, citing having had open heart surgery in his request for an extension. The board ruled the untimely filing deprives it of jurisdiction, yet still considered and rejected the request for a good cause extension of the deadline. The deadline is a claim-processing rule, not involving jurisdiction; therefore, the board must consider the veteran's extension request. Vacated.
Court: Court Of Appeals For Veterans Claims, Judge: Toth , Filed On: May 28, 2024, Case #: 21-3467, Categories: Health Care, Veterans, Due Process
J. Toth finds the Board of Veterans Appeals improperly denied the veteran's claim. The veteran reached a settlement with the VA regarding his incurring a disability due to negligent VA medical treatment. He asked the VA to associate his tort claim documents with his VA benefits claim file. Acknowledging the settlement, the VA noted the veteran had not submitted evidence in connection with his tort claim, as it was shielded as attorney work product. Though attorney opinions are shielded, the VA must ensure that all relevant service medical records are obtained and fully evaluated, and these are not shielded from disclosure. Vacated.
Court: Court Of Appeals For Veterans Claims, Judge: Toth , Filed On: May 23, 2024, Case #: 22-3726, Categories: Tort, Veterans, Privilege
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Toth finds the Board of Veterans Appeals properly issued its decision after an Army Vietnam veteran asked the board to delay issuing the decision regarding his disagreement with the effective date of compensation for cardiovascular disease. He sought delay until after his representative received a copy of his claims file in order to submit evidence. The veteran then filed a formal appeal for direct review, which allows for a more immediate decision, and the board issued its opinion before evidence was submitted. Because other procedural options exist, the fair process doctrine does not entitle the veteran to a delay when he requested expedited review. Affirmed.
Court: Court Of Appeals For Veterans Claims, Judge: Toth, Filed On: April 24, 2024, Case #: 22-3957, Categories: Health Care, Veterans, Due Process
J. Toth denies the veteran's petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to prevent Veterans Affairs from limiting his continued entitlement to post-9/11 GI Bill education benefits while his administrative appeal proceeds. Though he said he will suffer irreparable harm if the issue was not resolved before the fall 2023 semester, he can still appeal any future adverse agency decision affecting the benefits, and so has an adequate alternative means of relief. Threat of irreparable harm has been removed by action that correctly calculated the veteran's eligibility for continued benefits before the semester began.
Court: Court Of Appeals For Veterans Claims, Judge: Toth , Filed On: March 13, 2024, Case #: 23-2589, Categories: Education, Veterans, Due Process