Dudnick v. BrownDudnick v. Brown
- Reporters:
- , ,
- Before:
- Farley
ORDER
PER CURIAM.On April 2, 1996, the appellant filed a Notice of Appeal from a June 1, 1995, Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board or BVA) decision. On November 14, 1996, the Secretary filed a motion for remand pursuant to 61 Fed.Reg. 52, 695 (1996) (to be codified at
The Court agrees that a remand is appropriate. Although the new amendments became effective after the appellant filed his appeal with this Court, the Court and VA are required to apply the amendments to the extent that they are more favorable to the claimant than the earlier provisions. See *80Swann v. Brown, 5 Vet.App. 229, 232 (1993); see also Hayes v. Brown, 5 Vet.App. 60, 66-67 (1993); Kamas v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 308, 313 (1991). It is not function of this Court to make such a determination in the first instance. “[RJather it is the function of this Court to decide whether such factual determinations made by the BVA ... constituted clear error.” Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 49, 53 (1990). Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is
ORDERED that the June 1, 1995, BVA decision is VACATED and the matter is REMANDED for readjudieation, on the basis of all applicable law, regulation, and procedure, and for issuance of a readjudicated decision supported by an adequate statement of reasons or bases. See