Plain-English summary
Court affirms that VA’s ‘benefit-of-the-doubt’ determinations are factual and reviewed deferentially
The Court held that whether evidence is in “approximate balance” under the veterans’ benefit-of-the-doubt rule is a predominantly factual determination. The Federal Circuit’s decision favoring deference to the Department of Veterans Affairs was affirmed.
Why this matters
This decision confirms that courts give deference to the VA’s factual judgments about whether evidence is balanced under the benefit-of-the-doubt rule. That makes it harder for veterans to overturn denials on the ground that the VA misapplied the statutory tie-breaker when courts review those determinations.
Who may feel it
- Veterans and their families seeking VA disability benefits
- Veterans’ attorneys and veterans service organizations
- Department of Veterans Affairs adjudicators and regional offices
- Courts that review VA decisions
Key questions
- Is the VA’s determination that evidence is in “approximate balance” under the benefit-of-the-doubt rule a legal or factual question?