Terms of Use Agreement

1. You agree, through your use of these public Forums, not to post any material which is unlawful, libelous, defamatory, obscene, vulgar, sexually orientated, abusive, hateful, harassing, threatening, harmful, invasive of privacy or publicity rights, inflammatory or otherwise objectionable. You also agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you. You further agree not to use these public Forums for advertising or other commercial enterprise purposes. Any questions directed to, or concerning the administration of this website, will be sent to and not posted to the public Forums.

2. All postings express the views of the author, and neither the administrators nor POPASMOKE will be held responsible for the content of any postings submitted by the Members or anyone else. The administrators of these Forums reserve the right to remove, edit, move or close any postings for any reason. Members who make postings on the Forums which are not in accordance with the Terms of Use Agreement, risk having their posting privileges withdrawn.
See more
See less


  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61


    Well, I was wrong again. I thought maybe someone in the legal system would give a break to the vets and stand by us on what I consider a common sense issue. Maybe the DAV will try to run it past the Supreme Court but who knows.
    Here is the legal brief. It is a little tedious to read and all they are doing is saying the VA interpretation of their regulations was right. So what is wrong with changing the regs to benefit disabled veterans???


    • #62

      I sent an e-mail to DAV regarding the future of this case and this is the response for those who are interested. It looks grim but like Chesty Puller said, when you are surrounded by the enemy they are easier to kill. We may be at the last barricade but I am not giving up yet.

      Hello and good morning Brian.
      In reference to your email of July 30, 2006, concerning the bilateral tinnitus case the following is noted:
      The Federal Circuit's decision does not become final until the conclusion of any proceeding before the Supreme Court of the United States. The DAV anticipates that it will file a petition for a writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court on behalf of Mr. Smith. If the petition is denied, then the Federal Circuit's decision becomes final. If the petition is granted, then the Federal Circuit's decision will not become final until the Supreme Court issues its decision.
      Let us hope it is a positive response.

      Mr. Carroll Clay Saucier
      Disabled American Veterans
      1301 Clay Street, Room 1110, North
      Oakland, CA 94612-5209
      Office (510) 834-2921
      Fax (510) 834-1331
      Cell (925) 787-5297


      • #63
        Book on Tinnitus and Service

        Y'all have probably seen this:

        I haven't looked at it, but thought it might be of interest to you.


        • #64
          Macalester, Oklahoma VARO

          Caution - they are not veteran friendly. You will have to fight for what you get. I suggest, if you are well documented that you work in conjunction with one of our U.S. Senators or Congresman. Do not hesitate to communicate directly with the Secritary of Veterans Affairs in D.C. either. Your going to get your records marked "Congresional Interest" but that is not a stigma, it is a plus.

          Don't know anything about the "Tinnitus" thing, just the VARO he was dealing with. They do have some GOOD PEOPLE (I hope I didn't get anyone cut out of a job with direct communication when I was struggling to get to 100%) but, they will fight you even with overwhelming medical documentation. In my case they also have attempted to block government life insurance from paying anything when I go. I'll be happy to furnish a copy of their award letter to anyone who'd like to see documentation of what I have written here... SimperFi to all
          Last edited by jim-uc62; 09-21-2006, 12:19. Reason: clarification and added explanation
          James Mansfield
          HMM-163 1962


          • #65

            At this point in the process, the congressional interest flag is not going to be helpful in my opinion. There are about 3000 of us nationwide who have an appeal claim for bi-lateral tinnitus pending and the outcome of the Supreme Court review will determine whether we will get an increase or not. As you may know, the court is not influenced by congressional interest and there is no guarantee that they will even look at the Smith case that represents all of us.

            I worked as the veteran and military rep for a congressman for 8 years and generally speaking, congressional interest can help, depending on the issue but I don't think this is one of them.

            "Proud to be a Veteran"


            • #66
              The latest I can find on this topic..

              O R D E R

              This order amends Miscellaneous Order 05-06 (issued July 12, 2006).

              For the reasons stated in Miscellaneous Order 05-06, until further order of this Court, all appeals that concern bilateral tinnitus in whole or in part currently pending with this Court and not yet stayed, shall be stayed as of the date of this order. Further, any other such appeals filed after the date of this order, shall be stayed on the date each such appeal is filed. Because, on September 18, 2006, a petition for a writ of
              certiorari was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court to review the judgment of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Smith v. Nicholson, 451 F.3d 1344 (Fed. Cir. 2006), these stays shall remain in effect until
              the Supreme Court has acted on the petition.

              DATED: September 25, 2006 FOR THE COURT


              • #67
                Supreme Court Review

                I saw Justice Ginsberg on TV this AM and she was not commenting on cases but she did say that they have about 100 cases to review and they would be starting Monday. I think it was the DAV that filed the Writ of Certeori. I hope they can convince the court. I am now wondering if any of the other Veteran Organizations file Amecus Briefs with the court. I am not too optimistic but I will keep my fingers crossed.
                You may also know that there is a move underfoot in Congress to try to buy out 10 and 20% disabled veterans. A bad move in my humble opinion. What happens if a disability gets worse. What happens if a veteran is desparate or has some problem and gets ten grand and pisses it away in a weekend. No more disability check in the middle of the month. This is only being discussed at the present time.


                • #68
                  Buy out?

                  If the 10% and 20% Vets were offered a buyout I'm curious how that would work. Seems the word commitment only may work one way should that happen. I commit to serve my country for so long and they commit to medical benefits I incurred while serving for life, or till I'm 70, or till I'm dead or until they decide to stop.I think I am going to call my congressman right now!


                  • #69
                    Seems to me, the buyout thing is a procedure in lieu of anticipated barrage of claims. Legals like to defer to precidence, and heretofore buyouts would be such that.

                    Altho I had to ask my screener person to repeat herself on several occasions, she said my hearing was just fine and actually above averagfe for my age and experience. Commercial hearing specialists beg to differ with her, but she is the one that can refer me to compensation and treatment.


                    • #70

                      Huh? What did you say?


                      • #71

                        I learned today that the Veterans Benefits Commission has rejected the idea of a buyout for the 10% and 20% disabled veterans. The information was in a column in the VVA Veteran magazine. The theory is that it does not benefit the veteran, the military retiree or the government. I hope this issue stays submerged forever.

                        In the meantime we continue with hope against hope that the Supreme Court will make a favorable ruling on Bi-Lateral Tinnitus. I am not holding my breath.


                        • #72
                          Supreme Court update

                          Here is the latest on what is happening on this issue in the Supreme Court.


                          At least it is still alive.


                          • #73
                            Another one bites the dust

                            Well, the veterans lose again, so what else is new. Forgive me if I am pessimistic....................

                            Last edited by Chippysgt; 02-06-2007, 21:41.


                            • #74
                              Well Chippysgt it's kinda like VA disability math. 10+10 =10.

                              1 ear + 1 ear = 1 ear...


                              • #75
                                Well it is official and I have it n print. Got my BVA ruling yesterday. I may have two ears affected by tinnitus but I onle get one 10% rating..

                                Soggy noodles to me.