Summary
The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that Marcos Greenidge was a prevailing party under the Equal Access to Justice Act after the Veterans Court vacated an ultra vires Board of Veterans’ Appeals decision issued before a jurisdiction-conferring notice of disagreement was filed. The court reversed the denial of attorneys’ fees and remanded for further proceedings.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether a veteran is a prevailing party under the Equal Access to Justice Act when the Veterans Court vacates an ultra vires Board decision issued before a jurisdiction-conferring notice of disagreement was filed and dismisses the appeal rather than remanding.
- Whether the Veterans Court's remand-specific prevailing-party test applies to a disposition consisting of vacatur and dismissal without a remand order.
Holdings
- Where the Board acts ultra vires by issuing an adverse decision before a jurisdiction-conferring notice of disagreement is filed, the veteran's success in obtaining vacatur of that decision confers prevailing-party status under the EAJA.
- The Federal Circuit's remand-specific prevailing-party test does not apply when the Veterans Court vacates an agency decision and dismisses the appeal without issuing a remand order.
Key quotations
“Where the Board acts ultra vires in preemptively issuing an adverse decision before any jurisdiction-conferring NOD is filed, the veteran’s success in obtaining vacatur of that decision confers prevailing party status under EAJA.” (10)
“Mr. Greenidge’s claim before the Veterans Court was that the Board exceeded its jurisdiction by taking up and deciding his claim without a jurisdiction-conferring NOD. And he succeeded on the merits of that claim when the Veterans Court vacated the erroneous Board decision.” (10)
Factual background
Greenidge, a Vietnam-era veteran, received service connection for PTSD in 1993. In 2019, the Board determined that he was entitled to an earlier effective date based on clear and unmistakable error and remanded for implementation and consideration of a higher rating. Before Greenidge filed the required notice of disagreement concerning the regional office's denial of a higher rating, the Board preemptively denied the higher-rating claim; the Veterans Court later vacated that decision as issued without jurisdiction and dismissed the appeal.
Procedural history
The Board of Veterans' Appeals preemptively adjudicated Greenidge's request for a higher disability rating before he filed the notice of disagreement required to confer jurisdiction. The Veterans Court vacated the Board's ultra vires decision and dismissed Greenidge's appeal. The Veterans Court later denied Greenidge's EAJA fee application, concluding that he was not a prevailing party because he had not obtained a remand requiring further agency proceedings or materially altering the parties' legal relationship. The Federal Circuit reversed and remanded.
Remand instructions
Remanded to the Veterans Court for further proceedings consistent with the Federal Circuit's opinion, including reconsideration of Greenidge's EAJA fee application in light of his prevailing-party status.