Moore v. Nicholson
United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims
21 Vet. App. 211 (2007)

- Written by Carolyn Strutton, JD
Facts
Dwayne Moore (plaintiff) served on active duty in the United States Army from 1988 until 1991, when he was hospitalized and eventually discharged for a personality disorder. In 1992, Moore applied for a service-connected disability for his mental illness with the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) (defendant), but he was initially denied. After extended proceedings, the VA finally granted Moore a service connection for atypical affective disorder in 1999, with a 10 percent disability rating effective back to 1992. Moore appealed the rating percentage, and the VA increased his disability rating to 30 percent effective from 2002 forward. Moore appealed the VA’s decision to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (the board). The board increased Moore’s disability rating to 30 percent from 1997 to 2002, and to 50 percent from 2002 forward. As part of its evaluation, the board reviewed the evidence from four different VA medical examinations that Moore had received over the years of proceedings. Moore appealed the board’s decision to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, alleging that the medical examinations he had received from the VA had all been inadequate because the medical examiners had not specifically evaluated the effects of his illness on his ability to work.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Lance, 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.