Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca13-20-01486/USCOURTS-ca13-20-01486-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Cherrie A. Hollie
Appellant
Robert Wilkie
Appellee

Document Text:

NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________

CHERRIE A. HOLLIE,

Claimant-Appellant

v.

ROBERT WILKIE, SECRETARY OF VETERANS 

AFFAIRS,

Respondent-Appellee

______________________

2020-1486

______________________

Appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for 

Veterans Claims in No. 19-1265, Chief Judge Margaret C. 

Bartley.

______________________

Decided: June 3, 2020

______________________

CHERRIE A. HOLLIE, Oakland, CA, pro se. 

 DAVID PEHLKE, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil 

Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent-appellee. Also represented by 

JOSEPH H. HUNT, CLAUDIA BURKE, ROBERT EDWARD 

KIRSCHMAN, JR. 

 ______________________

Case: 20-1486 Document: 21 Page: 1 Filed: 06/03/2020
2 HOLLIE v. WILKIE

Before NEWMAN, LOURIE, and SCHALL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

DECISION

Cherrie A. Hollie appeals the November 27, 2019 decision of the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans 

Claims (“Veterans Court”) in Hollie v. Wilkie, No. 19-1265, 

2019 WL 6334692 (Vet. App. Nov. 27, 2019). In that decision, the Veterans Court affirmed the December 27, 2018 

decision of the Board of Veterans Appeals (“Board”) that 

denied Ms. Hollie recognition as the surviving spouse of 

veteran Charlie Hollie for purposes of entitlement to survivor benefits. Suppl. App. 8. For the reasons stated below, 

we dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.

DISCUSSION

I.

Mr. Hollie served on active duty in the U.S. Marine 

Corps from June of 1960 to June of 1964. He served in the 

U.S. Navy from August of 1964 to August of 1968. The Hollies married in July of 1970 and divorced in April of 1976. 

Mr. Hollie died in March of 2009. His death certificate 

listed his marital status as divorced. Hollie, 2019 WL 

6334692 at *1.

In February of 2015, Ms. Hollie filed a claim for survivor benefits. A VA regional office (“RO”) in due course denied the claim. The RO stated that Ms. Hollie could not 

qualify for benefits as a surviving spouse because, at the 

time of Mr. Hollie’s death, she and Mr. Hollie were divorced. Id.

Following the RO’s decision, Ms. Hollie appealed to the 

Board. As noted, in its December 27, 2019 decision, the 

Board denied Ms. Hollie’s claim for survivor benefits. The 

Board did so on the ground that Ms. Hollie did not qualify 

as a “surviving spouse” under 38 C.F.R. § 3.50(b). That regulation defines a “surviving spouse” for purposes of death 

Case: 20-1486 Document: 21 Page: 2 Filed: 06/03/2020
HOLLIE v. WILKIE 3

benefits as “the spouse of the veteran at the time of the veteran’s death.” 38 C.F.R. § 3.50(b). Since Ms. Hollie was 

divorced from Mr. Hollie at the time of his death, she could 

not satisfy the regulation’s requirement. Suppl. App. 9–11. 

As noted, the Veterans Court affirmed the decision of 

the Board. The court stated that, “[i]n this case, the law is 

dispositive and requires that a person be married to a veteran at the time of the veteran’s death to qualify as a surviving spouse for the purposes of [dependency and 

indemnity compensation (“DIC”)] and [a] survivor death 

pension.” Hollie, 2019 WL 6334692 at *3. The court noted 

Ms. Hollie’s argument that she met the requirements for 

benefits under 38 C.F.R. § 3.54 because she was married to 

Mr. Hollie for over a year and they had a child during their 

marriage. Id. at *2. As the court explained, however, 

§ 3.54 applies only to those who qualify as a “surviving 

spouse.” Id. at **2, 4. The court concluded: “[T]he Board 

did not clearly err and provided adequate reasons or bases 

for its determination that Ms. Hollie does not qualify as a 

surviving spouse for DIC and survivor death pension purposes.” Id. at *4. Following the Veterans Court’s decision, 

Ms. Hollie appealed to us.

II.

Our ability to review a decision of the Veterans Court 

is limited. Scott v. Wilkie, 920 F.3d 1375, 1377–78 (Fed. 

Cir. 2019). “Pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 7292(a), we may review the validity of a Veterans Court’s decision on ‘a rule 

of law or of any statute or regulation . . . or any interpretation thereof’ that the Veterans Court relied on in making 

its decision.” Id. (omission in original). “Unless the case 

presents a constitutional issue, we ‘may not review (A) a 

challenge to a factual determination, or (B) a challenge to 

a law or regulation as applied to the facts of a particular 

case.’” Id. (citing 38 U.S.C. § 7292(d)(2)).

Case: 20-1486 Document: 21 Page: 3 Filed: 06/03/2020
4 HOLLIE v. WILKIE

III.

As seen, the Board determined that Ms. Hollie is not 

entitled to benefits because she does not qualify as a “surviving spouse” under 38 C.F.R. § 3.50(b). On appeal, Ms. 

Hollie does not challenge the validity of § 3.50(b). Neither 

does she argue that, in affirming the Board’s decision, the 

Veterans Court erred in interpreting the regulation, and 

she does not raise a constitutional issue. Rather, as she did 

before both the Board and the Veterans Court, she maintains her argument for benefits under 38 C.F.R. § 3.54 and 

advances various equitable arguments as to why she 

should receive survivor benefits. While we are sympathetic 

to Ms. Hollie’s circumstances, we are unable to consider her 

arguments. That is because they all, in one way or another, 

challenge the Veterans Court’s application of the law, in 

this case 38 C.F.R. § 3.50(b), to the facts of her case. As 

noted above, the statute that gives us the power to review 

decisions of the Veterans Court bars us from considering 

the kinds of arguments that Ms. Hollie is making. For this 

reason, the only course available to us is to dismiss Ms. 

Hollie’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, Ms. Hollie’s appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

DISMISSED

COSTS

No costs.

Case: 20-1486 Document: 21 Page: 4 Filed: 06/03/2020