Veterans Justice Group v. Secretary of Veterans Affairs

818 F.3d 1336 (2016)

From our private database of 45,900+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Veterans Justice Group v. Secretary of Veterans Affairs

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
818 F.3d 1336 (2016)

Play video

Facts

The Veterans Administration (VA) (defendant) provided compensation to military veterans who suffered from disabilities resulting from injury in the line of duty. The VA’s original regulation provided for an informal process by which veterans could apply for compensation. Later, however, the VA proposed a new rule that sought to standardize and modernize the claim-initiation process. The proposed rule would have allowed claimants to establish a claim’s effective date through the submission of an electronic application. The VA received a number of comments regarding the proposed rule. Some commenters expressed concerns over the claim process. In response to the comments, the VA promulgated a final rule, which established a different claim process, known as an intent-to-file process. This process would have allowed applicants to establish a claim’s effective date by submission of a written intent to file a claim on a standard VA form, or through several other means. The American Legion and other veterans’ organizations (plaintiffs) brought suit, arguing that the final rule’s intent-to-file provision should be set aside because the VA did not follow the proper notice-and-comment rulemaking procedures required by the Administrative Procedure Act (the act). The VA countered that the final rule was a logical outgrowth of the proposed rule and thus did not violate the act’s requirements. The case was heard by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Wallach, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 742,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 742,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 45,900 briefs, keyed to 984 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 742,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 45,900 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership