Hyatt v. Shinseki

566 F.3d 1364 (Fed. Cir. 2009) · United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · May 27, 2009 · No. 2008-7163

Summary

The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the denial of Mrs. Julianne Hyatt's motions to substitute herself for her deceased husband in his veterans' benefits appeal and to have the Veterans Court's judgment reissued nunc pro tunc. The court held that she lacked standing because the court-martial records sought on remand would not constitute evidence in the file at the date of death for purposes of an accrued-benefits claim under 38 U.S.C. § 5121. The court also concluded that substitution was unnecessary and that nunc pro tunc relief was unavailable.

Holdings

  1. An accrued-benefits claimant seeking substitution to obtain nunc pro tunc relief need not show that the underlying judgment would result in an imminent entitlement to benefits. The claimant need only show that failure to reissue the judgment nunc pro tunc would adversely affect the accrued-benefits claim in some way.
  2. The widow was not adversely affected by withdrawal of the Veterans Court's decision because the court-martial records were not evidence in the VA's possession at the date of the veteran's death and therefore could not be considered in her accrued-benefits claim under 38 U.S.C. § 5121(a).
  3. Section 5121(c) did not permit submission of the court-martial records because the regulation limits post-death evidence under that subsection to evidence necessary to establish the claimant's eligibility to receive accrued benefits, and the records were not offered for that purpose.
  4. Because the widow could not be substituted as a party, nunc pro tunc relief was unavailable.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the surviving spouse had standing to be substituted as a party in the deceased veteran's Veterans Court appeal.
  2. Whether an accrued-benefits claimant must show an imminent entitlement to benefits before substitution and nunc pro tunc relief may be available.
  3. Whether court-martial records that were not in the VA's actual possession at the veteran's death could qualify as evidence in the file at the date of death under 38 U.S.C. § 5121(a).
  4. Whether the Veterans Court's judgment could be reissued nunc pro tunc when substitution was unavailable.

Disposition

affirmed

Cases Cited (9)

  • Hyatt v. Nicholson, 21 Vet.App. 390, 395 (2007)(cited)
  • Hyatt v. Peake, 22 Vet.App. 211, 213-16 (2008)(reviewed)
  • Bailey v. West, 160 F.3d 1360, 1362 (Fed. Cir. 1998) (en banc)(cited)
  • Richard v. West, 161 F.3d 719, 723 (Fed. Cir. 1998)(cited)
  • Zevalkink v. Brown, 102 F.3d 1236, 1241-44 (Fed. Cir. 1996)(cited)
  • Padgett v. Nicholson, 473 F.3d 1364, 1366-70 (Fed. Cir. 2007)(followed)
  • Pelea v. Nicholson, 497 F.3d 1290, 1291-93 (Fed. Cir. 2007)(distinguished)
  • Hayes v. Brown, 4 Vet.App. 353, 360 (1993)(cited)
  • Bell v. Derwinski, 2 Vet.App. 611, 611-13 (1992)(distinguished)

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…