UPDATE 07-18-11 BCMR STORY
Major Court Decision Rules Against BCMR’S
On JULY 13, 2011, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that the military BCMR’S ( Board For Correction of Military Records ) were arbitrary and capricious, committed an abuse of discretion, and violated matters of law.
Wilhelmus v. Geren, Civil Action No: 09-662, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75020
U.S. Federal Judge James E. Boasberg in his Memorandum Opinion under “ B “ PRECEDENT, stated; “Defendant ( ARMY BCMR ) first responds that the ABCMR is not bound by precedent because it is a board of equity. Defendant has not cited a single case in support of this novel legal argument “. Moreover, “ it is axiomatic that an agency must treat similar cases in a similar manner unless it can provide a legitimate reason for failing to do so “. KREISS III, 406 F.3d at 687
Again quoting Judge Boasberg; “ Even if the ABCMR is not required to distinguish every similar prior decision, the need to consider relevant precedent becomes especially acute when a plaintiff has pointed to a specific prior decision as very similar to his own situation. In such cases, the Board may not simply ignore such precedent for the sake of expediency “.
Late last year, this writer posted up two (2) stories on VETERANSTODAY, one, “ BCMR’S Seriously Failing Their Mandate to Veterans “, and the other, “ Report says BCMR’S Flying Blind, No Pilot “. Thanks to this latest Court Decision, WILHELMUS v. GEREN, this writer was spot on the mark with FAILURE TO FOLLOW LEGAL PRECEDENT. The legal term, “ stare decisis “ means to stand by and adhere to decisions and not disturb what is settled. In CASEY v. U.S. 8 Fed. Cl.Ct. 234 (1985) Judge YOCK ordered that veterans with a BAD SPN, SDN, or SPD code, should have had a DUE PROCESS HEARING before Discharge.
ALL veterans who submitted a claim with the military BOARDS from 1986 to NOW, if you had a BAD CODE and were not told, you can have your case placed back before the BOARD for reconsideration based upon “ ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS, ABUSE OF DISCRETION, and INJUSTICE “. While acknowledging the existence of a prior case, the BCMR here entirely failed to distinguish it or to justify why the outcome in this case was different.
Since everything has been turned into an adversarial matter when it comes to veterans requesting justice for errors against their person, whether V.A. or correction of military records, veterans must now be made aware of LEGAL DECISIONS that effect how they proceed with their claims. Finding knowledge in the law is not a sin, it is however, beneficial to winning a claim submitted by the veteran, and having brother veterans like this writer ( Edwin Crosby ) who gather data to help vets with claims of INJUSTICE against their person is why we stick together helping one another.
For the BCMR stories, as well as, the WILHELMUS court decision go to: veterancourtcodes.com and look under the word PAGES on the right side of the site. APFN.org calls this site the best vets site on the internet.