Kennedy v. Wilkie
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
33 Vet. App. 114 (2020)

- Written by Sarah Hoffman, JD
Facts
Keith Kennedy, a veteran, was awarded total disability due to service-connected depression and a left-knee condition. Keith died on November 1, 2005, and depression was listed as a contributory cause of death on his death certificate. Keith’s wife, Florence Kennedy (plaintiff), filed a claim for dependency and indemnity compensation (DIC) benefits based on a service connection for Keith’s death. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) (defendant) denied Florence’s claim. Florence did not appeal. In March 2013, Fast Letter 13-04, issued by the director of Pension and Fiduciary Services of the VA, stated that if a service-connected disability was listed as a contributory factor on a death certificate, that disability should be presumed as contributing substantially and materially to the veteran’s death. In July 2015, Florence requested that the claim regarding Keith be reopened. The VA granted Florence’s claim and awarded Florence benefits based on Fast Letter 13-04. The Board of Veterans’ Appeals subsequently denied Florence’s request that the award be effective as of 2013, and Florence appealed. On appeal, the parties’ arguments focused on whether Fast Letter 13-04 was liberalizing or a VA issue under 38 C.F.R. § 3.114(a).
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Allen, 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.