Legal Opinion · Dissent

D'Amico v. West

United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims

Decided May 3, 1999No. 97-786Published

1Dissent

STEINBERG and KRAMER, Judges,

dissenting:

An en banc decision was requested by Judge Steinberg in this case in order to reconsider the holding of Laruan v. West, 11 Vet.App. 80 (1998) (en banc), that “before becoming entitled to ‘status’ as a claimant for [Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) ] benefits, an appellant ha[s] first to demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence (1) that he or she was a ‘veteran,’ or (2) ‘veteran’ status for the person upon whose military service the claim for VA benefits was predicated.” Id. at 84 (quoting Aguilar v. Derwinski, 2 Vet.App. 21, 23 (1991)); see…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Gilbert v. DerwinskiUnited States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · 1990
  3. Martin v. Occupational Safety & Health Review CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  4. Federal Election Commission v. Democratic Senatorial Campaign CommitteeSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  5. Lewis Hodge, Claimant-Appellant v. Togo D. West, Jr., Secretary of Veterans AffairsCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998

19 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