Legal Opinion · Dissent

Leonard Beraud v. Eric K. Shinseki

United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims

Decided May 17, 2013No. 11-0726Published

1DissentBartley, Judge

I respectfully dissent because the majority wrongly limits the effect of 38 C.F.R. § 3.156(b) and the Board’s failure to address whether § 3.156(b) warrants an earlier effective date of benefits prejudiced Mr. Beraud. Section 3.156(b), “Pending claim, ” indicates that pendency of a claim continues until the requisite new and material evidence is considered. Here, the veteran’s Naval Reserve medical records referenced in his 1985 submission appear to be yet unobtained. See R. at 1852-53 (1990 rating decision showing that the new evidence considered consisted solely of 1989 VA outpatient…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Burke Hensley, Claimant-Appellant v. Togo D. West, Jr., Secretary of Veterans AffairsCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2000
  2. Gonzales v. WestCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2000
  3. Robert J. Ingram v. R. James NicholsonUnited States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · 2007
  4. McGee v. PeakeCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2008
  5. Payne v. DerwinskiUnited States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · 1990

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API