Woods v. United States
20-1462
| Fed. Cl. | Jun 23, 2021Background
- Byron O. Woods, Sr. served in the Marines and was diagnosed with stage 3 chronic kidney disease (CKD) in Feb. 2007; multiple physicians advised against reenlistment and anticipated progression.
- VA granted Woods a disability rating (30%, later increased to 50%) around the time of his separation.
- Woods separated June 19, 2007; he completed a separation physical, was found "qualified to discharge," and signed a form acknowledging he was found physically qualified and would not receive DES processing or disability retirement.
- He had late-service disciplinary issues (an NJP and related adverse fitness report); the BCNR later expunged references to the NJP but denied placing Woods on the Permanent Disability Retirement List, finding his CKD treatable/stable and not shown to have caused unfitness.
- Woods filed with the BCNR in 2018 seeking disability retirement and other record corrections, and then sued in the Court of Federal Claims seeking placement on the disability list, removal of a "legal hold," and a constitutional declaration.
- The Court of Federal Claims granted the Government’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction: it held Woods’s disability and legal-hold claims accrued at separation in 2007 and are time-barred under the six-year statute of limitations, so the court did not reach the merits.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jurisdiction over disability-retirement claim (money-mandating & timeliness) | Woods sought judicial review of BCNR denial and equitable placement on permanent disability list | Govt. acknowledged §1201 is money-mandating but argued claim is nonjusticiable/untimely because it accrued at 2007 separation | Court: §1201 is money-mandating, but claim accrued at separation in 2007 and is untimely; dismissal for lack of jurisdiction |
| Accrual and waiver (did limitations start at separation?) | Woods contended BCNR denial justified later challenge | Govt. pointed to medical records, Woods’s own statements, and his signed form showing knowledge and waiver at separation | Court: Woods knew of his CKD and its severity at discharge and signed an acknowledgment; statute of limitations began at separation |
| Jurisdiction over legal-hold and constitutional claim | Woods sought removal of legal hold and a declaration that it violated his constitutional rights | Govt. argued the claim accrued in 2007, is time-barred, and lacks a money-mandating basis so CFC cannot grant equitable relief alone | Court: Claim accrued in 2007, is untimely, and CFC lacks jurisdiction to grant purely equitable relief absent a money-mandating claim |
| Review of BCNR’s substantive denial (arbitrary/capricious/APA review) | Woods challenged BCNR's refusal to grant disability retirement | Govt. defended BCNR’s findings as supported by the record | Court: Did not reach merits because of lack of jurisdiction; noted BCNR’s factual findings supported dismissal if merits reached |
Key Cases Cited
- Chambers v. United States, 417 F.3d 1218 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (statute-of-limitations accrual and waiver principles for military disability claims)
- Fisher v. United States, 402 F.3d 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (10 U.S.C. §1201 is money-mandating)
- United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. 392 (U.S. 1976) (Tucker Act does not create substantive rights)
- John R. Sand & Gravel Co. v. United States, 552 U.S. 130 (U.S. 2008) (timeliness under §2501 is jurisdictional)
- Real v. United States, 906 F.2d 1557 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (waiver where veteran had knowledge of condition at separation)
- United States v. King, 395 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1969) (Court of Claims historically cannot grant certain equitable record corrections absent money claim)
- Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment, 523 U.S. 83 (U.S. 1998) (court must establish jurisdiction before reaching merits)