Heino v. Shinseki
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
683 F.3d 1372 (2012)
- Written by Carolyn Strutton, JD
Facts
William Heino (plaintiff) was a veteran who received medication through the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) (defendant). Heino paid a copayment for the medication he received but believed that the copayment he was charged by the VA was too high under the governing statute, 38 U.S.C. § 1722A. Under § 1722A, the VA was prohibited from charging any copayments for medicine it dispensed in excess of the cost to the VA for the medicine. The VA had promulgated regulations at 38 C.F.R. § 17.110 that interpreted the statute as allowing the VA to include administrative costs, not just the direct cost of the medicine itself, in the copayments that it charged. Heino believed that this regulation violated the clear terms of the statute and petitioned the VA to lower his copayment. When the VA refused to do so, Heino filed an appeal with the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (the board), which upheld the VA’s decision. Heino then appealed to the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (the veterans court), which upheld the board’s decision. Heino then appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Wallach, J.)
Concurrence (Plager, 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.
