Jennie R. Lefevre, Sally M. Hill, Frederick L. Rada and Mary Christina Veldman v. Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that it is nearly “impossible” for veterans to prove exposure on a case-by-case basis
• finding that the Secretary's decision not to create a presumption of service-connection for particular diseases was a substantive rule in part because the decision had \an immediate and practical impact\ on veterans claiming benefits
• explaining that the Dioxin Act “require[d] the [VA] to create or reject a presumption-of-service connection for particular diseases, based upon the statistical probability of such connection, as reflected in scientific studies”
• stating that under § 502 the Federal Circuit may review “substantive rules of general applicability, statements of general policy and interpretations of general applicability because these are all actions to which section 552(a)(1
• finding that the Secretary’s decision not to create a presumption of service-connection for particular diseases was a substantive rule in part because the decision had “an immediate and practical impact” on veterans claiming benefits
• “Congress ... recognized that ordinarily it would be impossible for an individual veteran to establish that his disease: resulted from exposure to herbicides in Vietnam.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).