"It is the duty of the people to care for him who shall have borne the battle, his widow, and orphan."
-Abraham Lincoln

Friday, April 2, 2010

Singleton: Stabilized Disability Ratings under Section 3.344

Section 3.344, A Stabilized Disability Rating

The case of George Singleton v. Eric K. Shinseki, Opinion Number 08-1131, decided March 25, 2010, affirmed a PTSD and schizophrenia disability rating of 70%.

The Board of Veteran Appeals assigned an initial staged disability ratings for the veteran for PTSD and schizophrenia from 1980 to 2001. The staged ratings include a 50% rating for a portion of 1980, a 100% rating for 1980-1991, a 70% rating for 1991-2000, and a 100% rating for the time after 2000.

The veteran appealed the 70% rating for the time in 1991-2000 and made two major arguments. First, the veteran argued the Board erred in only granting 70% for this time. The Court noted that while a private psychiatrist had found that the veteran could not function independently outside his home, the Board discounted the opinion based on evidence that he held multiple jobs during this time. Here, the Board considered the relevant evidence but merely reached a different conclusion than the veteran would reach. The Court basically decided that the Board’s explanation was full and adequate and that the veteran failed to show that the decision was clearly erroneous, which would require a showing that although evidence supported the Board’s decision, the Court is left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.

Second, and more important as precedent, the veteran argued that 38 C.F.R. § 3.344 (regarding stabilized disability ratings) applied and prevented the reduction of his rating from 100% to 70%. Section 3.344 requires that a stabilized disability rating (one that has been in effect for 5 years or more) cannot be reduced without a recent, full and complete medical examination. The purpose for Section 3.344 is to protect veterans who are reliant on a disability rating from an arbitrary reduction. In this case, the Board had just service-connected the veteran and was making an initial rating which considered years into the past.

The Court essentially found that Section 3.344 does not apply to initial staged ratings in large part because “[w]here benefits are reduced retrospectively in the staged disability ratings context, there is no danger that a veteran will be deprived of income that he or she is accustomed to using to meet day-to-day expenses.” Thus, the Court accepted the VA’s interpretation and argument that Section 3.344 only applies to prospective rating reductions.

Decision written by Judge Kasold and joined by C.J. Green and J. Schoelen.

No comments:

Post a Comment