Shedden v. Principi
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
381 F.3d 1163 (2004)

- Written by Carolyn Strutton, JD
Facts
Jerry Shedden (plaintiff) was an active-duty Marine from 1968 to 1972. After leaving service, Shedden filed multiple claims with the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) (defendant) for disability compensation for psychiatric disorders, including post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). All of Shedden’s claims were denied by the VA at the initial level. Shedden eventually appealed one of the denials to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (BVA), alleging that new and material evidence existed and that his claims should therefore be reopened. The BVA held that there was no evidence supporting a finding that Shedden had acquired a psychiatric disorder during service, or at a point related to his service, or that he suffered from PTSD and therefore denied his claim. Approximately six years later, Shedden again filed a claim to the BVA, alleging that the previous BVA decision had included a clear and unmistakable error, because the decision had failed to recognize a statutory presumption of service connection for a psychiatric condition he suffered during active duty, as required under 38 U.S.C. § 105(a). The BVA again rejected Shedden’s claims and further held that § 105(a) did not create such a statutory presumption. Shedden appealed the decision to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, which upheld the BVA’s decision, holding that there was no statutory presumption, and also that Shedden had failed to establish that he had suffered a psychiatric condition during active service. Shedden then appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Dyk, 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.