38 C.F.R. § 20.900
Rule 900. Applicability
The provisions in this subpart apply to Board decisions and remands rendered in legacy appeals, as defined in § 19.2 of this chapter.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 755
cases (27 in the last 5 years), 2003–2025 · leading case: John R. Ramsey Et Al. v. R. James Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 16 (Vet. App. 2006).
John R. Ramsey Et Al. v. R. James Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 16 (Vet. App. 2006). “Any other provision of this Rule notwithstanding, a case may be postponed for later consideration and determination if such postponement is necessary to afford the appellant a hearing.”
Martin v. O'Rourke, 891 F.3d 1338 (Fed. Cir. 2018). “§ 7107 (a)(4); 38 CFR § 20.900 . 4 There is no similar first-in-first-out require- ment for other portions of the VA process (such as rating decisions, SSOCs, BVA certification or docketing).”
Nicholas Ribaudo v. R. James Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 552 (Vet. App. 2007). “To the extent that the phrase "in regular order according to its place on the docket" is ambiguous, and to the extent that the Secretary is permitted to interpret that ambiguous phrase by regulation and has done so in 38 C.F.R. § 20.900 , that regulation does not authorize the…”
Nicholas Ribaudo v. R. James Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 137 (Vet. App. 2007). “§ 7107 (a)(2); 38 C.F.R. § 20.900 (c) (noting that a case may be advanced on the Board's docket if "the appellant is seriously ill or is under severe financial hardship, or if other sufficient cause is shown" (emphasis added)).”
Nat'l Org. of Vets. Advocates, Inc. v. Sec'y of Vets. Affairs, 809 F.3d 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2016). “38 C.F.R. § 20.900 (a)(2). NOVA argues that the requirement of a remand to the agency of original jurisdiction is also unlawful.”
Dailey v. Principi, 17 Vet. App. 61 (Vet. App. 2003). “Jim Jensen, Director, Management and Administration (for the Board), informed the petitioner that, with respect to his desire to have his case “advanced on the Board’s docket,” such advancement required a showing of good cause pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900 (c). Pet. at 3; see…”
Harold Daye v. R. James Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 512 (Vet. App. 2006). “§ 7107 and 38 C.F.R. § 20.900 (c) due to his advanced age, the Board also shall proceed expeditiously on remand in accordance with section 302 of the Veterans’ Benefits Improvement Act, Pub.”
Jackson v. Dept. Of Vets. Affairs, 421 Fed. Appx. 957 (Fed. Cir. 2011). “The Board advanced his appeal on its docket under 38 C.F.R. § 20.900 (c). On September 8, 2009, the Board again remanded both issues to the regional office.”
13-21 312 (Board of Vet. App. 2016).
13-18 508 (Board of Vet. App. 2016).
10-03 839 (Board of Vet. App. 2016).
06-21 788 (Board of Vet. App. 2016).
— 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c) — 1 case
16-48 735 (Board of Vet. App. 2018).
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.