1 F.4th 1059
Fed. Cir.2021Background
- Adolfo Arellano served in the Navy from Nov. 1977 to Oct. 1981 and filed a VA claim for service‑connected psychiatric disability on June 3, 2011 (≈30 years after discharge). VA granted service connection and a 100% rating, with an effective date of receipt (June 3, 2011).
- 38 U.S.C. § 5110(a)(1) sets the default effective date as the date VA receives an application; § 5110(b)(1) creates an exception: if the application is received within one year of discharge, the effective date is the day after discharge.
- Arellano argued § 5110(b)(1)’s one‑year period should be equitably tolled due to his mental illness so his award’s effective date would reach back to the day after discharge.
- The Board and the Veterans Court denied equitable tolling, relying on Federal Circuit precedent (Andrews v. Principi) that § 5110(b)(1) is not subject to equitable tolling; Arellano appealed to the Federal Circuit en banc.
- The Federal Circuit (en banc) affirmed the Veterans Court. The court unanimously held equitable tolling cannot afford Arellano an earlier effective date; the court was equally divided, however, on the underlying legal rationale (i.e., whether § 5110(b)(1) is a statute‑of‑limitations amenable to Irwin or, if so, whether the presumption is rebutted), leaving Andrews intact.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Irwin presumption of equitable tolling applies to 38 U.S.C. § 5110(b)(1) (i.e., is § 5110(b)(1) a statute of limitations subject to equitable tolling?) | Arellano: Irwin applies; Andrews should be overruled and § 5110(b)(1) may be tolled for equitable reasons (mental disability). | Secretary: § 5110(b)(1) is not a statute of limitations (it sets an effective date), and/or the Irwin presumption is rebutted by § 5110’s text and structure. | Court: Result affirmed; the court is equally divided on reasoning. Andrews remains binding that § 5110(b)(1) is not amenable to equitable tolling. |
| If Irwin applies, whether equitable tolling is warranted on Arellano’s facts (mental disability/caregiver) | Arellano: His psychiatric disability prevented timely filing and equitable tolling should apply. | Secretary: Even if tolling were theoretically available, the facts (caregiver available, no showing of inability to file earlier) do not justify tolling. | Court: On the merits the panel is split; a majority would not decide the factual tolling question in the first instance and would remand for factual development; the ultimate judgment affirms denial of earlier effective date. |
Key Cases Cited
- Andrews v. Principi, 351 F.3d 1134 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (held § 5110(b)(1) not subject to equitable tolling; governs Federal Circuit precedent)
- Irwin v. Department of Veterans Affairs, 498 U.S. 89 (1990) (established rebuttable presumption that equitable tolling applies to statutes of limitations in suits against the government)
- Brockamp v. United States, 519 U.S. 347 (1997) (statutory text and detailed exception schemes can rebut Irwin presumption)
- Lozano v. Montoya Alvarez, 572 U.S. 1 (2014) (one‑year treaty provision was not a statute of limitations; presumption of equitable tolling inapplicable)
- Petrella v. Metro‑Goldwyn‑Mayer, Inc., 572 U.S. 663 (2014) (lookback damages provisions can operate as statutes of limitations)
- Young v. United States, 535 U.S. 43 (2002) (lookback period treated as a statute of limitations for purposes of equitable tolling analysis)
- Cloer v. Secretary of Health & Human Servs., 654 F.3d 1322 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (Vaccine Act filing deadline is a statute of limitations amenable to equitable tolling)
- Sebelius v. Auburn Regional Medical Center, 568 U.S. 145 (2013) (declined to apply Irwin presumption to an agency internal appeal deadline based on statutory history and context)
- Zipes v. Trans World Airlines, 455 U.S. 385 (1982) (EEOC filing period functions like a statute of limitations and is subject to equitable tolling)
- Hallstrom v. Tillamook County, 493 U.S. 20 (1989) (a pre‑suit notice provision is not always a statute of limitations and need not be equitably tolled)