Kassidy A. Perkins v. Douglas A. Collins
24-6515
Vet. App.May 16, 2025Background
- Appellant Kassidy A. Perkins served one continuous 6-year period of active duty in the U.S. Air Force from 2014 to 2020, receiving an honorable discharge.
- She applied for educational benefits, and the VA determined she was eligible for both the Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB, Ch. 30) and the Post-9/11 GI Bill (Ch. 33), but required her to give up MGIB to receive Post-9/11 benefits.
- Perkins appealed, arguing her lengthy service entitled her to benefits under both programs up to the statutory aggregate cap (48 months), without double-counting any period of service.
- The Board of Veterans’ Appeals denied her MGIB benefits, citing 38 U.S.C. § 3322(h) as barring veterans with a single period of post-2011 service from dual eligibility.
- The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Rudisill v. McDonough (2024) provided important precedent, addressing whether lengthy—but distinct—service periods gave rise to separate entitlements under both bills.
Issues
| Issue | Perkins' Argument | Secretary's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does a single lengthy period of service entitle a veteran to both MGIB and Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits (without double-counting service)? | Perkins: Yes, if service is long enough to qualify for both, each period can be allocated without overlap, as per Rudisill. | Secretary: No, § 3322(h) bars dual eligibility for single periods of service post-August 1, 2011, requiring a benefit choice. | Yes. Length of service, not number of periods or start date, is determinative; no bar if no double-counting. |
| Did the Board err by requiring a break in service for dual entitlement? | Perkins: Break is not needed; allocating distinct years suffices; Rudisill controls. | Secretary: Break is required; Rudisill limited to vets with non-continuous service periods. | Break not needed; long continuous service can support dual entitlement. |
| Does § 3322(h) bar dual entitlement based only on the effective date of the service period? | Perkins: No; statute bars only overlapping use of the same time, regardless of effective date. | Secretary: Yes; after effective date, single-period service is barred from dual entitlement. | No; statutory language contains no such date-based restriction, and effective date argument rejected. |
| Did the Board's interpretation lead to absurd or inconsistent results? | Perkins: Yes; veterans with less total service but breaks get more benefits—an absurd outcome. | Secretary: No relevant response apart from statutory interpretation defense. | Yes; court notes that statutory interpretation should avoid absurd results. |
Key Cases Cited
- Rudisill v. McDonough, 601 U.S. 294 (2024) (veterans with lengthy, non-overlapping qualifying service can receive both MGIB and Post-9/11 benefits, subject to 48-month cap, with the length—not the number—of qualifying periods being key)
- Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, 603 U.S. 369 (2024) (traditional statutory interpretation principles guide court's review of agency actions)