The Supreme Court announced Monday it will review a legal battle brought by veterans who say they deserve the benefit of the doubt over the government when their disability claims are considered a close call.
Joshua Bufkin and Norman Thornton argued through their lawyers that they should have received the benefit of the doubt in the court’s analysis of their benefits claims, which were denied.
They say that when the Veterans Court was established, it was directed to give veterans — not the government — the benefit of the doubt when determining and weighing evidence in a disability claims dispute.
They say that standard was also codified more recently with the Veterans Benefits Act of 2002.
“It is a longstanding policy in veterans’ law that the veteran, not the government, receives the benefit of the doubt on any close issue. The benefit-of-the-doubt rule is among the oldest principles of veterans’ claim adjudication,” they wrote in their filing. “Despite its long history and consistent efforts from Congress to mandate VA’s compliance, in practice the benefit-of-the-doubt rule has proved illusory for many veteran claimants.”
Mr. Bufkin was discharged from the Air Force after he was told he could divorce his wife — who was suffering from mental illness — and stay in the service, or leave the service due to her issues impacting him.
He says it was the ultimatum that made him leave the military, which has produced his Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.
Mr. Thornton was in the Army and served overseas. He was diagnosed after he returned with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and “Gulf War Syndrome.”
Both men were denied their disability benefits, and the decisions were upheld by the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals.
Through their lawyers, the men say the appeals court should have evaluated the evidence based on the benefit-of-the-doubt standard instead of just looking for errors during proceedings at the Veterans Court.
The case is Joshua Bufkin v. Denis McDonough, Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
It will be argued during the next term, which begins in October.
The feds had told the justices not to review the case, and that both veterans had repeatedly had their claims denied by the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Veterans Court and the Federal Circuit.
“In any event, the legislative history does not support petitioners’ theory that Congress intended to create a new standard for Veterans Court review of the Board’s benefit-of-the-doubt determinations,” the federal government argued in its brief.