(a) General. Except as provided in § 3.652, where evidence requested in connection with an initial claim or supplemental claim or for the purpose of determining continued entitlement is not furnished within 1 year after the date of request, the claim will be considered abandoned. After the expiration of 1 year, further action will not be taken unless a new claim is received. Should the right to benefits be finally established, pension, compensation, dependency and indemnity compensation, or monetary allowance under the provisions of 38 U.S.C. chapter 18 based on such evidence shall commence not earlier than the date of filing the new claim.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501)
(b) Department of Veterans Affairs examinations. Where the veteran fails without adequate reason to respond to an order to report for Department of Veterans Affairs examination within 1 year from the date of request and payments have been discontinued, the claim for such benefits will be considered abandoned.
(c) Disappearance. Where payments of pension, compensation, dependency and indemnity compensation, or monetary allowance under the provisions of 38 U.S.C. chapter 18 have not been made or have been discontinued because a payee's present whereabouts is unknown, payments will be resumed effective the day following the date of last payment if entitlement is otherwise established, upon receipt of a valid current address.
Cross References:Periodic certification of continued eligibility. See § 3.652. Failure to report for VA examination. See § 3.655. Disappearance of veteran. See § 3.656.
[27 FR 11887, Dec. 1, 1962, as amended at 28 FR 13362, Dec. 10, 1963; 52 FR 43063, Nov. 9, 1987; 62 FR 51278, Sept. 30, 1997; 67 FR 49586, July 31, 2002; 84 FR 169, Jan. 18, 2019]
Notes of Decisions
Bill M. Noah v. Robert A. McDonald, 28 Vet. App. 120 (Vet. App. 2016).
· cites it 15× “In the November 2014 decision on appeal, the Board acknowledged that, in 1981, 38 C.F.R. § 3.158 , provided that a claim will be considered abandoned "[w]hen evidence requested in connection with an original claim, .”
Clarence W. Kowalski v. R. James Nicholson, 19 Vet. App. 171 (Vet. App. 2005).
· cites it 7× “Kowalski, without good cause or adequate reason, had refused to report for his scheduled VA examination, and thus, under 38 C.F.R. § 3.158 (2001), had abandoned his hearing-loss claim.”
Morris v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 260 (Vet. App. 1991).
· cites it 10× “Under 38 C.F.R. § 3.158 (a) (1990), the Board concluded that the earliest effective date to which appellant was entitled was November 7, 1985, the date he reopened the claim that led to service connection being granted.”
Dingess - Hartman v. Nicholson, 19 Vet. App. 473 (Vet. App. 2006).
· cites it 2× “at 10-11 (citing 38 C.F.R. § 3.158 (a) (2001)). The Board found that, other than the abandoned claim, "no formal or informal claim of service connection for PTSD was received prior to [Mr.”
Betzaida P. Jernigan v. Eric K. Shinseki, 25 Vet. App. 220 (Vet. App. 2012).
· cites it 7× “” See also 38 C.F.R. § 3.158 (a) (1995) (stating that, where requested evidence is not received within one year of the date of the request, “further action will not be taken unless a new claim is received.”
Hurd v. West, 13 Vet. App. 449 (Vet. App. 2000).
· cites it 4× “However, under 38 C.F.R. § 3.158 : [W]here evidence requested in connection with .”
Charles v. Shinseki, 587 F.3d 1318 (Fed. Cir. 2009).
· cites it 4× “§ 5108 and 38 C.F.R. § 3.158 (a) when it concluded that the 1980 Rating Decision was final.”
Jones v. West, 12 Vet. App. 98 (Vet. App. 1998).
· cites it 5× “38 C.F.R. § 3.158 (b) (1998) (boldface italics added).”
Robinette v. Brown, 8 Vet. App. 69 (Vet. App. 1995).
· cites it 2× “§ 5103 (a) (emphasis added); see also 38 C.F.R. § 3.158 (1994). The Secretary, contrary to the requirement of Brown v.”
Evans v. West, 12 Vet. App. 396 (Vet. App. 1999).
· cites it 3× “at 5 (citing 38 C.F.R. § 3.158 (a) (1998)) (VA regulation regarding abandoned claims).”
Hyson v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 262 (Vet. App. 1993).
· cites it 3× “See 38 C.F.R. § 3.158 (a) (1992); Hyson, BVA 91-18735, at 8.”
Wamhoff v. Brown, 8 Vet. App. 517 (Vet. App. 1996).
· cites it 3× “38 C.F.R. § 3.158 (a). Next, section 3.329, a regulation that is no longer in effect, required that “[e]very person applying for or in receipt of compensation or pension shall submit to examinations .”
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.