Sunday, November 24, 2013

Walters v. National Association of Radiation Survivors case brief

Walters v. National Association of Radiation Survivors case brief summary
473 U.S. 305 (1985)


CASE SYNOPSIS
United States Veterans Administration sought review of a preliminary injunction from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in appellee veteran associations' suit, contending that 38 U.S.C.S. § 3404, which limited to $ 10, the fee that could be paid an attorney or agent who represented a veteran seeking benefits for death or disability, violated the due process clause of U.S. Constitutional Amendment V.

CASE FACTS
United States Veterans Administration (VA) sought review of a preliminary injunction in appellee veteran associations' suit contending that 38 U.S.C.S. § 3404, which limited to $ 10 the fee that may be paid an attorney or agent who represented a veteran seeking benefits for death or disability, violated the due process clause of U.S. Constitutional Amendment V, as it denied veterans the opportunity to retain counsel of their choice.

DISCUSSION

  • On appeal, the injunction was reversed. 
  • In support of its ruling, the Supreme Court held that the lower court erred in its application of the Mathews analysis in assessing due process violations, in that insufficient deference was accorded the legislature's goal of wanting veterans to receive the entirety of their award free from payment to attorneys. 
  • The Court further held that appellees failed to show that the difference in success rate in adjudicating appeals before the VA with counsel, and the existence of complexity in some cases, was sufficient to warrant a conclusion that the right to retain and compensate an attorney was a necessary element of procedural fairness under U.S. Constitutional Amendment V.

CONCLUSION
An injunction was reversed as appellees failed to show that the difference in success rate in adjudicating appeals before the VA with counsel, and the existence of complexity in some cases, was sufficient to warrant a conclusion that the right to retain and compensate an attorney was a necessary element of procedural fairness under the Constitution.

Recommended Supplements for Civil Procedure

No comments:

Post a Comment

Search Thousands of Case Briefs and Articles.