In this episode of Arguendo: The Veterans Law Podcast, Amy Kretkowski and Amy Odom examine Hamill v. Collins, a closely watched Federal Circuit case addressing whether the Appeals Modernization Act’s enhanced notice requirements can coexist with the long-standing implicit denial doctrine. They explore the legal background of the case, the statutory framework governing VA decision notices, the arguments presented by both sides at oral argument, the broader implications for veterans seeking benefits, and more.

Note: The case “Hamill v. Collins” was decided on February 4, 2026. This episode was recorded prior to this decision but accurately predicted its outcome.

For more information, visit our websites at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠cck-law.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ and abkveteranslaw.com

For more information, visit our websites at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠cck-law.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ and abkveteranslaw.com

In this episode of Arguendo, Amy Odom and Amy Kretkowski analyze Boehringer v. Collins, a case testing whether a veteran can trigger AMA’s continuous pursuit rules by filing a supplemental claim within a year of a legacy Board decision. They break down the statutory argument under Section 2(x) of the AMA, the government’s position on finality, and the broader implications for effective dates in a dual-system world. A must-listen for those tracking how AMA and legacy rules intersect.

For more information, visit our websites at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠cck-law.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ and abkveteranslaw.com

For more information, visit our websites at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠cck-law.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ and abkveteranslaw.com

For more information, visit our websites at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠cck-law.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ and abkveteranslaw.com

In this episode of "Arguendo: The Veterans Law Pod," hosts Amy Kretkowski and Amy Odom dissect two pivotal cases from the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims and the Federal Circuit. They explore the complexities of Frantzis v. Wilkie, discussing the removal of statutory language and its impact on the rights of veterans within the AMA framework, and delve into Hamilton v. McDonough, where the intricacies of the attorney work-product doctrine in veterans' benefits claims are scrutinized. This episode provides a deep dive into the legal arguments, judicial interpretations, and broader implications of these decisions.

For more information, visit our websites at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠cck-law.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ and abkveteranslaw.com

For more information, visit our websites at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠cck-law.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ and abkveteranslaw.com

Join hosts Amy Odom and Amy Kretkowski as they delve into oral arguments and legal trends observed at the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims and the Federal Circuit. In this episode, they discuss three cases from the Veterans Court: Haskell v. McDonough, and Held v. McDonough. They offer listeners a glimpse into the challenges veterans face during the appeals process.

For more information, visit our websites at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠cck-law.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ and abkveteranslaw.com

Join hosts Amy Odom and Amy Kretkowski for the début episode of “Arguendo: The Veterans Law Pod.” Amy and Amy delve into oral arguments and legal trends observed at the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims and the Federal Circuit. In this episode, they discuss three cases from the Veterans Court: Kernz v. McDonough, Ferko v. McDonough, and Bolds v. McDonough. They offer listeners a glimpse into the challenges veterans face during the appeals process.

For more information, visit our websites at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠cck-law.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ and abkveteranslaw.com