Bracewell's attorneys often dedicate their time and talents to the communities they work in, helping those without access to quality legal services navigate the legal system. Veterans' issues are known for being particularly complex, and one of the firm's attorneys recently proved that using a skilled approach can change the outcome of even a long-standing case.
Mark Font recently went before the Board of Veterans' Appeals, where he presented evidence and argued for his client to receive veteran disability benefits more than 40 years after the client filed his original claim. The case not only took place in a complicated VA system, but also presented a challenge in its history – the longevity of the ongoing case, unusual facts and the destruction of records made it an unusual contest.
During basic training in 1966, the client sustained injuries to his feet that required hospitalization. While at the VA hospital receiving treatment for his foot injuries, he contracted a fever, and his subsequent treatment led to a coma and a severe allergic reaction to penicillin. After being discharged in 1967, the client applied for and was summarily denied benefits for his foot injury claim. He went to work in the private sector, but continued to suffer from foot pain and other ailments, and continued to try to fight his own way through the VA system over the next four decades.
After receiving a referral for the case in 2008, Mr. Font revisited the timeline and the evidence, contacting physicians and accessing military records, which allowed him to highlight the client's lifelong medical problems related to the injuries he sustained during basic training. A major impediment to the success of the case was the fact that all records from the client's hospitalization and treatment during basic training had been destroyed. Mr. Font also reviewed the client's prior VA claims records and researched similar VA appeals. This enabled him to recognize issues in the client's prior claims, invalidate previous appeals decisions, reassemble the existing evidence to discredit prior opinions and to properly reflect the origin of the injuries, and secure additional evidence to confirm and bolster his client's claim for benefits. Mr. Font presented the case in July 2009, and was able to prove that the original discharge papers were insufficient and that his client's lifelong foot injuries were a result of those sustained in training.
The strategy worked. Not only did the Board determine that the client was eligible for disability benefits, but its decision noted that the specific research done by Mr. Font was the reason that a previously unsuccessful case was victorious. His dedication to the case allowed him to transform the client's claim and develop a winning strategy. The case is currently awaiting a final decision on the compensation due to the client.
