Beth Kubala (center) meets with two student lawyers with the Betty and Michael D. Wohl Veterans Legal Clinic.
On Thursday, June 12, the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Soto v. United States, marking a significant victory for U.S. combat veterans seeking disability compensation.
The 9-0 opinion, authored by Justice Clarence Thomas, held that the six-year statute of limitations under the Barring Act does not apply to claims for Combat-Related Special Compensation (CRSC). The Court found that the CRSC statute includes its own internal settlement mechanism and therefore is not subject to the same limitations as other federal claims.
Seth M. Owens, a veterans health and disability law fellow and program manager of the LSV-H Program at 黑料不打烊 College of Law鈥檚 Betty and Michael D. Wohl Veterans Legal Clinic (VLC), along with several VLC students, played a major part in this win, along with other schools.
The National Law School Veterans Clinic Consortium submitted a Brief of Amicus Curiae on behalf of Veteran Soto鈥檚 position, and on behalf of all combat veterans who would qualify for special compensation under the CRSC statute. Counsel for the brief were Katie M. Becker, Esq. (University of Missouri Veterans Legal Clinic), Meghan E. Brooks, Esq. (University of South Carolina Veterans Legal Clinic), and 聽Owens.
鈥淐redit is due to the teams of students from three different law schools who each took a role in preparing this brief,鈥 says Owens. 鈥淚t is truly an honor to collaborate with such talented veterans law practitioners and have an opportunity to show our students how their advocacy can have a real-world impact on a large scale. They not only advocated for Veteran Soto to prevail in this case, but for the rights of all combat veterans to receive the full disability benefits they deserve under the law.鈥
For media inquiries, please contact Vanessa Marquette, media relations specialist, at vrmarque@syr.edu
