A federal appeals court overturned a veterans’ court decision that allowed the Department of Veterans Affairs to deny claims without issuing a formal notice to the veteran. (Christopher Palamara/Office of Military Commissions)
WASHINGTON — A federal appeals court overturned a veterans’ court decision that allowed the Department of Veterans Affairs to deny claims without issuing a formal notice to the veteran.
A three-judge panel sent the case back to the lower court for further action that aligns with its ruling.
The U.S. Court of Appeals in Arlington, Va., ruled Wednesday in a case involving David A. Hamill, 36, of Illinois, who left the Marine Corps in 2013 with an other-than-honorable discharge and later was denied disability benefits because of his discharge status.
The case centered on the VA’s silence when Hamill requested that the VA reconsider its “character of discharge determination” for denying him certain benefits.
A veteran’s discharge determination generally must be under honorable or general conditions to qualify for VA benefits.
The judges stated in their written opinion that the VA must provide clear notice to veterans when it denies claims. “After all, no veteran can appeal a decision he does not understand to have been made,” the judges wrote.
“The VA is still reviewing this decision and will respond appropriately. VA issues decision notices to all veterans who file a claim, and these notices often resolve several concurrent claims,” said Peter Kasperowicz, the VA press secretary.
The court has sent the case back to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims for further proceedings “consistent” with its opinion.
Hamill’s attorneys stated that the VA should have supplied a decision that he could appeal in court.
“Veterans, especially those with lower-than-honorable discharges, need to receive a clear decision by the VA,” said Yelena Duterte, an attorney and director of the Veterans Legal Clinic at the University of Illinois, one of the law firms representing Hamill.
“Failing to make a decision, as they did here, on a veteran’s status may create a barrier to health care, compensation, and other VA benefits,” Duterte said.
Hamill’s attorneys filed a lawsuit in 2022 in the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims to compel the VA to issue a decision on its discharge determination.
Hamill in 2021 had received disability compensation for PTSD but not for other ailments, according to court records.
The VA argued that it sent a letter to Hamill stating that he had not submitted “new and material evidence” to warrant reopening the case. The agency also advised him to petition to change his discharge status or update his military records.
The veterans court issued a ruling in 2024 that dismissed Hamill’s claim.
Hamill then challenged the decision in federal appeals court.
The new opinion, issued Wednesday, stated that the VA can no longer “implicitly” deny claims.
The judges referenced rules outlined in the Veterans Appeals Improvement and Modernization Act of 2017, which reformed the veterans appeals process for contesting disability claims decisions.
The opinion noted a congressional report about the act, explaining that it requires the VA to issue detailed notification letters to veterans on decisions.
“Accordingly, we hold that under the [Veterans Appeals Improvement and Modernization Act], a veteran has an appealable decision for a particular issue only if the decision gives him explicit notice that the issue is being adjudicated and how it is being decided,” the judges wrote.
The law’s intent is to better inform veterans who must decide whether to appeal a VA decision regarding their claims for benefits, according to the court’s ruling.
“Veterans deserve to know what the VA is doing with their claims,” said Renee Burbank, director of litigation at the National Veterans Legal Service Program and co-counsel in the case.
