William R. Young v. Eric K. Shinseki

LANCE, Judge, with whom HAGEL, Judge,

joins, dissenting:

In this case, a majority of the Court accepts the premise that the Court has *206appellate jurisdiction over a Board decision that refers a matter to an RO for an initial decision. Although this order of the en banc court is well meaning, it is legally incorrect, misguided in practice, and works a substantial injustice on veterans, taxpayers, and survivors.

I. INTRODUCTION

The infirmity of the majority opinion is simply breathtaking. The order announces a purportedly limited rule without providing analysis sufficient to support its conclusion.…