U.S. Code » Title 38 » Part PART II— GENERAL BENEFITS › Chapter CHAPTER 17— HOSPITAL, NURSING HOME, DOMICILIARY, AND MEDICAL CARE › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER I— GENERAL › Subtitle “Subtitle B— Patient Advocacy

38 U.S.C. § 922

IMPROVEMENT OF AWARENESS OF PATIENT ADVOCACY PROGRAM AND PATIENT BILL OF RIGHTS OF DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS.

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 38 CasesGoogle Scholar
“Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [July 22, 2016], the Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall, in as many prominent locations as the Secretary determines appropriate to be seen by the largest percentage of patients and family members of patients at each medical facility of the Department of Veterans Affairs—“(1) display the purposes of the Patient Advocacy Program of the Department and the contact information for the patient advocate at such medical facility; and“(2) display the rights and responsibilities of—“(A) patients and family members of patients at such medical facility; and“(B) with respect to community living centers and other residential facilities of the Department, residents and family members of residents at such medical facility.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 1996–1998 · leading case: Greathouse v. Newport News Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Co., 146 F.3d 224 (4th Cir. 1998).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Greathouse v. Newport News Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Co., 146 F.3d 224 (4th Cir. 1998). · cites it 2× “Great-house, an employee of Newport News Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Company (“Newport News Shipbuilding”), filed a claim under the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act, 38 U.S.C. § 922 , for additional workers’ compensation benefits (beyond those awarded him in 1981) by…”
ITO Corp of Virginia v. Pettus, 73 F.3d 523 (4th Cir. 1996). “38 U.S.C. § 922 . Because we do not believe that such a letter constitutes a valid request for modification of an existing compensation order, we reverse the decision of the BRB and remand with instructions to deny the compensation claim.”
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.