38 C.F.R. § 14.507

Opinions

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) A written legal opinion of the General Counsel involving veterans' benefits under laws administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs shall be conclusive as to all Department officials and employees with respect to the matter at issue, unless there has been a material change in controlling statute or regulation, a superseding written legal opinion by the General Counsel, or the designation on its face as “advisory only” by the General Counsel or the Deputy General Counsel acting as or for the General Counsel. Written legal opinions having conclusive effect under this section and not designated as precedent opinions pursuant to paragraph (b) of this section shall be considered by the Department of Veterans Affairs to be subject to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(2). Advice, recommendations, or conclusions on matters of Government or Department policy, contained within a written legal opinion, shall not be binding on Department officials and employees merely because of their being contained within a written legal opinion. Written legal opinions will be maintained in the Office of the General Counsel. Written legal opinions involving veterans' benefits under laws administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs, which pertain to a particular benefit matter, in addition to being maintained in the Office of the General Counsel, will be filed in the individual claim folder.

(b) A written legal opinion of the General Counsel involving veterans' benefits under laws administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs which, in the judgment of the General Counsel or the Deputy General Counsel acting as or for the General Counsel, necessitates regulatory change, interprets a statute or regulation as a matter of first impression, clarifies or modifies a prior opinion, or is otherwise of significance beyond the matter at issue, may be designated a “precedent opinion” for purposes of such benefits. Written legal opinions designated as precedent opinions under this section shall be considered by Department of Veterans Affairs to be subject to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(1). An opinion designated as a precedent opinion is binding on Department officials and employees in subsequent matters involving a legal issue decided in the precedent opinion, unless there has been a material change in a controlling statute or regulation or the opinion has been overruled or modified by a subsequent precedent opinion or judicial decision.

(c) For purposes of this section, the term written legal opinion of the General Counsel means a typed or printed memorandum or letter signed by the General Counsel or by the Deputy General Counsel acting as or for the General Counsel, addressed to an official or officials of the Department of Veterans Affairs stating a conclusion on a legal issue pertaining to Department of Veterans Affairs activities.

(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501) [54 FR 5613, Feb. 6, 1989, as amended at 61 FR 68666, Dec. 30, 1996]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 14 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1993–2024 · leading case: Blue Water Navy Vietnam Vets. Ass'n v. McDonald, 830 F.3d 570 (D.C. Cir. 2016).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Blue Water Navy Vietnam Vets. Ass'n v. McDonald, 830 F.3d 570 (D.C. Cir. 2016). “27-97, which was prec-edential and therefore binding upon the agency, see 38 C.F.R. § 14.507 (b). And it reiterated its stance in, among other documents, an agency policy manual.”

Disabled Am. Vets. v. Sec'y of Vets. Affairs, 859 F.3d 1072 (Fed. Cir. 2017). “§ 501 (c) (specifying that opinions and interpretations of the VA General Counsel must comply with § 552(a)(1)); 38 C.F.R. § 14.507 (b) (“Written legal opinions designated as precedent opinions [of the General Counsel] under this section shall be *1076 considered by the…”

Snyder v. Sec'y of Vets. Affairs, 858 F.3d 1410 (Fed. Cir. 2017). · cites it 2× “” 38 C.F.R. § 14.507 (b); compare with id. § 14.”

Janssen v. Principi, 15 Vet. App. 370 (Vet. App. 2001). “It is also important that a remand for the Board to determine under Kamas whether the VCAA duty-to-assist and notice amendments are more favorable than the pre-VCAA provisions they supplant would appear to be a pointless exercise, because VA’s General Counsel has already…”

Edward T. Splane & Paralyzed Vets. of Am. v. Togo D. West, Jr., Sec'y of Vets. Affairs, 216 F.3d 1058 (Fed. Cir. 2000). “See also 38 C.F.R. § 14.507 (b) ("Written legal opinions [of the General Counsel] designated as precedent opinions shall be considered by Department of Veterans Affairs to be subject to the provisions of 5 U.”

Dennis M. Chinnock v. Thomas K. Turnage, Adm'r, Vets.' Admin., 995 F.2d 889 (9th Cir. 1993). · cites it 2× “We have other evidence as well of the VA’s interpretation of this regulation previous to its amendment. A July 1990 opinion of the VA General Counsel determined that the list of diseases in § 3.”

Lamour v. Peake, 544 F.3d 1317 (Fed. Cir. 2008). “§ 7104 (c); 38 C.F.R. § 14.507 . The subject opinion has been applied in several rulings of the Veterans Court.”

Denver Sizemore v. Anthony J. Principi, 18 Vet. App. 264 (Vet. App. 2004). “§ 7104 (c); 38 C.F.R. § 14.507 (b), but the Board does not appear to have followed it.”

Brian M. Osman v. James B. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 252 (Vet. App. 2008). “at 11-13; see 38 C.F.R. § 14.507 (b) (2008) (“A written legal opinion of the General Counsel involving veterans’ benefits .”

Paralyzed Vets. of Am. v. Sec'y of Vets. Affairs, 308 F.3d 1262 (Fed. Cir. 2002). “38 C.F.R. § 14.507 (2001). Almost two years later, the General Counsel responded in an 11 page single-spaced memorandum to the Chairman, which, after the extensive legal analysis, answered the two questions the Chairman had posed.”

Glenn H. Jackson v. R. James Nicholson, 19 Vet. App. 207 (Vet. App. 2005). “For example, 38 C.F.R. § 14.507 (2004) provides that a VA General Counsel opinion is binding on VA officials and employees unless, among other things, it has been overruled or modified by a subsequent “judicial decision.”

Ruby S. Jackson, Claimant-Appellant v. Jesse Brown, Sec'y of Vets. Affairs, 55 F.3d 589 (Fed. Cir. 1995). “§ 501 (c); 38 C.F.R. § 14.507 (b). As Jackson recognizes, however, a request for Section 502 review in this court had to be filed within 60 days of the issuance of General Counsel precedent opinion 28-92, see Fed.”

Show all 14 citing cases →

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.