Francisco v. Brown
United States Court of Appeals for Veteran Claims
7 Vet. App. 55 (1994)

- Written by Carolyn Strutton, JD
Facts
Pedro Francisco (plaintiff) was a World War II veteran who was shot in the hand and the shoulder during combat and suffered residual disabilities as a result. In 1949, he was granted disability benefits rated at 20 percent for his shoulder condition and 10 percent for his hand, for a total disability rating of 30 percent. Over the following decades, Francisco applied multiple times to the Department of Veterans Affairs (the VA) (defendant) to have the disability rating for his shoulder condition increased. The VA repeatedly denied these claims, holding that the 20 percent rating was appropriate. In 1986, Francisco underwent a total shoulder replacement and again sought an increased rating. The VA granted Francisco a temporary increase to a 100 percent rating for one year following the surgery, followed by a return to the 20 percent rating. After Francisco protested the return to the 20 percent rating, a medical examination in 1988 showed that Francisco suffered from a lack of muscle strength and limited range of motion in the shoulder. The VA upheld the 20 percent rating, however, and Francisco again sought a rating increase. Francisco’s claim for an increased rating eventually came before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (the board). After the board remanded the claim for further medical testing, VA medical examinations in 1992 found that Francisco’s shoulder condition had improved, with fair strength, good mobility, and no severe impairment of function. The board denied an increased rating above 20 percent, and Francisco appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Holdaway, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.