Tell A Friend!

Breadcrumb
Home  >>  VA Claims Resources  >>  Cases
Articles
ALBERT R. OLSON, APPELLANT, V. JESSE BROWN, SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
By Tbird
Print    Email

ALBERT R. OLSON, APPELLANT, V. JESSE BROWN, SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, APPELLEE.

5 Vet App 4305 Vet. App. 430; 1993 US Vet App LEXIS 3981993 U.S. Vet. App. LEXIS 398

No. 91-542

August 23, 1993, Decided

UNITED STATES COURT OF VETERANS APPEALS

Before NEBEKER, Chief Judge, and MANKIN and IVERS, Judges.

Counsel                 George Estry (non-attorney representative) was on the pleadings for appellant.

                                James A. Endicott, Jr., General Counsel, David T. Landers, Acting Assistant General Counsel, Thomas A. McLaughlin, Deputy Assistant General Counsel, and Joan E. Moriarty were on the pleadings for appellee.

Opinion

Editorial Information: Prior History

 

On Appeal from the Board of Veterans' Appeals

Opinion by:                           MANKIN

{5 Vet. App. 431} MANKIN, Judge: Albert R. Olson appeals the November 27, 1990, Board of Veterans' Appeals (BVA or Board) decision which denied entitlement to an increased evaluation for undifferentiated schizophrenic reaction, currently evaluated as 70% disabling, and determined that new and material evidence had not been submitted to reopen his claim for a total evaluation (100%) based on individual unemployability, retroactive to July 1981. The Secretary of Veterans Affairs filed a motion for remand for the Board to consider whether appellant is currently entitled to a total evaluation based on individual unemployability. Appellant opposes this motion and contends that the decision which terminated his individual unemployability benefits contained clear and unmistakable error (CUE). We agree and are compelled to reverse the November 1990 BVA decision, as to this issue, and remand the matter for the Board to reinstate appellant's former total rating based on individual unemployability (IU), with an effective date of July 2, 1981. We affirm that part of the decision which denied an increased rating for schizophrenia.


Page 1 of 15 | Next Page »


943 Views