Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Institution
- File Type
Articles 1 - 10 of 10
Full-Text Articles in Law
“Not Reasonably Debatable”: The Problems With Single-Judge Decisions By The Court Of Appeals For Veterans Claims, James Ridgway
“Not Reasonably Debatable”: The Problems With Single-Judge Decisions By The Court Of Appeals For Veterans Claims, James Ridgway
James D. Ridgway
The U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) has statutory authority—unique among the federal appellate courts—to allow individual judges to decide appeals. As the CAVC completes the first quarter century of operations since its creation, this article examines the court’s use of this authority. Based upon two years of data developed and analyzed by the authors, this article concludes that outcome variance in single-judge decisions is a serious problem at the CAVC. Not only is there a substantial difference in the outcomes of appeals assigned to the different judges, but there are clear examples of decisions that violate the …
Toward A Less Adversarial Relationship Between Chevron And Gardner, James Ridgway
Toward A Less Adversarial Relationship Between Chevron And Gardner, James Ridgway
James D. Ridgway
In twenty-five years of judicial review of veterans benefits claims, the courts have failed to reconcile the interpretive canons of veteran friendliness and deference to the agency’s policy making role. This article argues that the courts must develop a coherent relationship between these doctrines by recognizing that each are core values of veterans law. First, it explores the history and nature of these two doctrines that are central to veterans law. Then, It considers how the canons are situated in the spectrum of fact- and value-based judicial review. Ultimately, separation-of-powers principles and the legislative history of the Veterans Judicial Review …
Recovering An Institutional Memory: The Origins Of The Modern Veterans Benefits System, 1914 To 1958, James Ridgway
Recovering An Institutional Memory: The Origins Of The Modern Veterans Benefits System, 1914 To 1958, James Ridgway
James D. Ridgway
Tracing statutory and regulatory history in veterans law can be exceptionally difficult. Although judicial review has only been available for a little more than two decades, the modern veterans benefits system evolved -- more by happenstance than design -- from the system that was originally adopted to serve WWI veterans. Tracing key statutory and regulatory provisions to their true origin is not easy because much of the legislative and regulatory history for veterans law provisions in the United States Code and the Code of Federal Regulations is simply incorrect. Moreover, even if a provision were traced past the false origins …
Fresh Eyes On Persistent Issues: Veterans Law At The Federal Circuit In 2012, James Ridgway
Fresh Eyes On Persistent Issues: Veterans Law At The Federal Circuit In 2012, James Ridgway
James D. Ridgway
Since the advent of judicial review of veterans claims over twenty years ago, representatives of veterans have chafed at the jurisdictional limits of the Federal Circuit. They have struggled to draw the court into a more active role in both reviewing individual decisions of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) and prodding the CAVC toward reversing the Department of Veterans Affairs’ Board of Veterans’ Appeals (BVA) more frequently. In 2012, there was a broad yet unsuccessful effort by veterans representatives to revisit the limits of judicial review. This article examines that effort, and explains that the dissatisfaction that …
Mind Reading And The Art Of Drafting Medical Opinions In Veterans Benefits Claims, James Ridgway
Mind Reading And The Art Of Drafting Medical Opinions In Veterans Benefits Claims, James Ridgway
James D. Ridgway
Once upon a time, deciding veterans benefits claims was simple and logical, although not perfect. Prior to the institution of judicial review, when a veteran filed a disability claim, the relevant records would be gathered and given to a panel of medical and legal experts. The experts would each bring their own specialized knowledge to the discussion and issue a decision that applied medical science and applicable law to the facts of the case. Such decisions may well have been correct as to the science and the law, but they were impossible to verify in the absence of any stated …
Equitable Power In The Time Of Budget Austerity: The Problem Of Judicial Remedies For Unconstitutional Delays In Claims Processing By Federal Agencies, James Ridgway
James D. Ridgway
This article begins the important work of synthesizing two areas of law that have been on a collision course recently: federal administrative law and structural reform remedies. The urgency of this problem is highlighted by two recent cases by the Supreme Court and the Ninth Circuit. They demonstrate both that the courts are unwilling to continue ignoring the widespread crises in federal agencies that manage benefit programs, and that the current model of equitable remedies for failing institutions is not up to the task of providing effective solutions. This article addresses the core case law and theory in both areas, …
Changing Voices In A Familiar Conversation About Rules Vs. Standards: Veterans Law At The Federal Circuit In 2011, James Ridgway
Changing Voices In A Familiar Conversation About Rules Vs. Standards: Veterans Law At The Federal Circuit In 2011, James Ridgway
James D. Ridgway
This review of the Federal Circuit's veterans benefits case law in 2011 suggests that a familiar struggle between rules and standards lurks under the surface of some of the more familiar debates in veterans law. In particular, it suggests that the struggle between Chevron deference and Gardner’s rule of resolving ambiguity in favor of the veteran can be framed this way. It also suggests that the rules-versus-standards framing can be used to better understand the debate about what it means for the benefits system to be veteran friendly. In addition, this article addresses the changing dynamics surrounding veterans law and …
The Veterans’ Judicial Review Act Twenty Years Later: Confronting The New Complexities Of Va Adjudication, James D. Ridgway
The Veterans’ Judicial Review Act Twenty Years Later: Confronting The New Complexities Of Va Adjudication, James D. Ridgway
James D. Ridgway
When judicial review was introduced to the veterans benefits system twenty years ago, there was great concern that it would push the informal, “claimant friendly” process towards a much more adversarial model. Although judicial review has improved the system in many ways, the system continues to suffer from serious problems. Much of the discussion about the current problems facing the VA adjudication system accept the false premise that the system is struggling to find balance between a paternalistic charitable model and an adversarial entitlement model. This has obscured the true conflict within the system. In reality, the VA system has …
Lessons The Veterans Benefits System Must Learn On Gathering Expert Witness Evidence, James D. Ridgway
Lessons The Veterans Benefits System Must Learn On Gathering Expert Witness Evidence, James D. Ridgway
James D. Ridgway
An adjudication system that lacks adequate evidence-gathering tools is destined to be both inefficient and rancorous. Accordingly, the time has come to examine how Congress can overhaul the evidence-gathering procedures for veterans benefits claims in order to conform with the modern process of claims adjudication. Fundamentally, the system has transformed from panels with legal and medical professionals deciding claims for which a veteran's evidence was insufficient as a matter of law, into groups of individual lay adjudicators weighing private and VA medical evidence on equal terms. The current evidence gathering procedures are insufficient to clarify the complex questions that arise …
Why So Many Remands?: A Comparative Analysis Of Appellate Review By The United States Court Of Appeals For Veterans Claims, James D. Ridgway
Why So Many Remands?: A Comparative Analysis Of Appellate Review By The United States Court Of Appeals For Veterans Claims, James D. Ridgway
James D. Ridgway
Many commentators have offered opinions about the outcome of cases at the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC). Most opinions assume the premise that the CAVC rarely reverses decisions of the Board of Veterans Appeals and remands matters for further proceedings at a very high rate. However, the statistical information available is limited and there has never been an empirical analysis of whether this premise is true. This article tests that premise by looking at the factors that shape CAVC decisions, conducting a detailed statistical analysis of outcomes in CAVC decisions, and comparing those results to published …