(a) A claimant for dependency and indemnity compensation may elect to furnish to the Department of Veterans Affairs in support of that claim copies of evidence which was previously furnished to the Social Security Administration or to have the Department of Veterans Affairs obtain such evidence from the Social Security Administration. For the purpose of determining the earliest effective date for payment of dependency and indemnity compensation, such evidence will be deemed to have been received by the Department of Veterans Affairs on the date it was received by the Social Security Administration.
(b) A copy or certification of evidence filed in the Department of Veterans Affairs in support of a claim for dependency and indemnity compensation will be furnished the Social Security Administration upon request from the agency.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501(a) and 5105)
Cross Reference:Claims filed with Social Security. See § 3.153.
[26 FR 1571, Feb. 24, 1961, as amended at 58 FR 25562, Apr. 27, 1993]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
8
cases, 1992–2016 · leading case:
Boggs v. Peake, 520 F.3d 1330 (Fed. Cir. 2008).
Boggs v. Peake, 520 F.3d 1330 (Fed. Cir. 2008).
· cites it 3× “One such administrative provision was 38 C.F.R. § 3.201 (a) (1956), which provides: New and material evidence, relating to the same factual basis (such as, in the case of a living veteran, the same disease or injury) as that of the disallowed claim, submitted subsequent to the…”
Murincsak v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 363 (Vet. App. 1992).
· cites it 3× “Appellant also argues, that under 38 C.F.R. § 3.201 (a), the VA is deemed to have received SSA records as of the date of the receipt of such records by the SSA.”
Jennings v. Mansfield, 509 F.3d 1362 (Fed. Cir. 2007).
· cites it 3× “See 38 C.F.R. § 3.201 (e) (1949) (“Decisions of adjudicating agencies of original jurisdiction do not become final until the expiration of the time within which an appeal may be filed.”
Vets. Just. Grp., LLC v. Sec'y of Vets. Affairs, 818 F.3d 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2016).
“§ 3004 (codifying 38 C.F.R. § 3.201 (a). (1956), which provided that where “[n]ew and material evidence” is submitted after a claim is finally disallowed, the new evidence “will constitute a new claim and have all the attributes thereof’); id.”
Karen S. McDowell v. Eric K. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 207 (Vet. App. 2009).
· cites it 2× “38 C.F.R. § 3.201 (b) ("As to the father, the sufficiency of evidence will be determined in accordance with the facts of the individual case.”
Tetro v. Gober, 14 Vet. App. 100 (Vet. App. 2000).
· cites it 2× “at 24, neither 38 C.F.R. § 3.201 (a) (1999 and earlier versions) (deeming evidence received by the SSA in support of a claim for Social Security old age, survivor, or disability benefits to have been received on the same date by VA) nor the statutory provision it implements, 38…”
Norma Van Valkenburg v. Eric K. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 113 (Vet. App. 2009).
· cites it 2× “§ 5105 (b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.201 (2009). Moreover, at oral argument, the Secretary advised the Court that any application form filed with SSA requesting survivor’s benefits would suffice to warrant an effective date for DIC based on the date of the SSA application.”
Tetro v. West (Vet. App. 2000).
“at 24, neither 38 C.F.R. § 3.201 (a) (1999 and earlier versions) (deeming evidence received by the SSA in support of a claim for Social Security old age, survivor, or disability benefits to have been received on the same date by VA) nor the statutory provision it implements, 38…”
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.