## Facts

- Jerry R. Shedden, a Marine Corps veteran (1968–1972), sought VA disability compensation for a psychiatric disorder, including PTSD.
- VA regional office decisions in 1980 and 1982 denied service connection; Shedden did not appeal, and the denials became final.
- In 1988, Shedden sought to reopen based on new and material evidence; the Board reopened but, in 1994, denied service connection on the merits.
- The 1994 Board decision found service medical records were silent for psychiatric complaints, treatment, or diagnosis and found no acquired psychiatric disorder shown during service or sufficiently close in time to relate to service.
- In 2000, Shedden alleged clear and unmistakable error (CUE) in the 1994 Board decision, arguing that 38 U.S.C. § 105(a) required a presumption favorable to service connection.
- The Board denied CUE; the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims affirmed and stated § 105(a) does not create a presumption of service connection.
- Shedden appealed to the Federal Circuit, challenging the statutory interpretation and the resulting CUE disposition.

## Issues

1. Whether 38 U.S.C. § 105(a) creates a presumption that an injury or disease incurred during active service is service-connected (through a line-of-duty presumption).
2. If the Veterans Court misstated § 105(a), whether the error was harmless in the CUE challenge to the 1994 Board decision.

## Decision

- The Federal Circuit held the Veterans Court erred by stating § 105(a) does not create a presumption of service connection.
- The court explained § 105(a) creates a presumption that an injury or disease incurred during active service was incurred “in line of duty,” subject to exceptions such as willful misconduct or substance abuse.
- The court nonetheless affirmed because the misstatement was harmless: Shedden did not show that applying the correct § 105(a) presumption would have manifestly changed the 1994 Board outcome under the CUE standard.

## Legal Principles

- 38 U.S.C. § 105(a) establishes a presumption that an injury or disease incurred during active military service was incurred in the line of duty, absent statutory exceptions.
- In the veterans’ compensation scheme, “incurred in line of duty” is treated as equivalent to “service-connected” for purposes of entitlement under 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110 and 1131.
- Service connection generally requires: (1) a current disability, (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury, and (3) a causal nexus between the current disability and the in-service event.
- CUE is a narrow collateral attack: the error must be undebatable and must have manifestly changed the outcome; disagreement with how evidence was weighed is insufficient.
- A legal misstatement may be harmless if correcting it would not change the result, including where the prior decision rests on independent factual findings defeating the claim.

## Conclusion

The Federal Circuit clarified that § 105(a) provides a line-of-duty presumption that operates as a presumption of service connection within the compensation statutes, but it affirmed the denial of CUE because Shedden could not show that this presumption would have compelled a different outcome given the prior findings of no in-service psychiatric disorder and no linkage to service.


Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163 (Fed. Cir. 2004)