Opinion ID: 4707703
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: One Published Precedent

Text: Our Court has analyzed § 511(a)’s limitation on judicial review of benefits decisions in only one published opinion, Hall v. United States Department of Veterans’ Affairs, 85 F.3d 532 (11th Cir. 1996). That case involved plaintiff William Hall, who was a recipient of veterans’ disability benefits and a Florida state prisoner. Hall, 85 F.3d at 532. The VA reduced his disability compensation pursuant to a regulation requiring that compensation be diminished during periods of incarceration for felony convictions in excess of 60 days. Id. at 532–33. The VA also sought the return of around $15,000 due to overpayments to Hall during his incarceration. Id. at 533. Hall’s lawsuit claimed that the regulation reducing benefits during incarceration was unconstitutional and requested payment of his full disability benefits. Id. This Court affirmed the dismissal of Hall’s lawsuit for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Id. at 533, 535. We stated that, “under the statutory scheme” established by the VJRA, “a veterans’ entitlement to benefits” can be reviewed only by appeal “to the Board [of Veterans Appeals], then to the Court of Veterans Appeals, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, and the Supreme Court.” Id. at 534 (emphasis added). Because the constitutionality of the regulation at issue was a question of law “necessary to a decision by the Secretary under a law affecting 27 USCA11 Case: 20-11365 Date Filed: 07/29/2021 Page: 28 of 58 veterans’ benefits,” the district court lacked jurisdiction to decide that question. Id. at 535. Hall’s lawsuit did not challenge any medical care received through the VA. Although he claimed that the reduction in his disability benefits “constituted a tort in violation of numerous provisions of the constitution,” he alleged no medical negligence by any VA professionals. Id. at 533. Rather, Hall alleged a quintessential benefits claim: he was entitled to the full amount of his disability benefits notwithstanding his incarceration. See id. at 532–33. Further, because the VA had reduced Hall’s benefits in an adverse benefits decision, Hall could appeal that benefits decision though the VA’s administrative appeals process. Id. at 534–35. Hall presents a clear example of a case over which a federal court lacks jurisdiction under the VJRA: a challenge to the constitutionality of a statute providing for the provision of benefits. See H.R. rep. No. 100-963, at 27. Unlike here, there was no medical negligence claim in Hall.