Hugh D. Cox, Attorney in Greenville, NC, proudly representing the disabled for rightful veterans benefits, Social Security benefits and Workers Compensation.
COVER SHEET for VA Evidence Intake Centers for Centralized Mail Processing (CMP) located at Newnan, Georgia and Janesville, Wisconsin and Regional Office mail being diverted to these CMP's.

        2411 B Charles Boulevard
       Greenville, North Carolina 27858
       Post Office Box 154
       Greenville, North Carolina 27835-0154
 Phone: (252) 757-3977
 Fax: (252) 757-3420
            North Carolina Bar Number 6567
           Department of Veterans Affairs Accreditation number  8925


About me
Contact me
Veteran Info
Social Security
Workers Comp
RO Tactics
Veteran Stories
Other Info
MacArthur Speech
Forms & Links
Other Info


The information contained in this website is general legal information and not legal advice on any legal subject. It is no substitute for the services of a

competent professional attorney experienced in these matters. This information is subject to change at any time due to new legislation or new court cases.


Updated C-File Request (June 27, 2015) This Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request includes the Newnan, Georgia and Janesville, WI Cover Sheet plus the request for ALL pages of the C-File either in paper form or digital media on CD or DVD containing Adobe Acrobat PDF. Many Regional Offices will not send the veteran the entire C-File unless requested under the FOIA.

Click here for Hugh Cox's Free Cover Sheet for Newnan, Georgia and Janesville, Wisconsin Evidence Intake Centers

Click here for Hugh Cox's PTSD Guide and Form

Click here for reasons NOT to use the VA PTSD Disability Benefits Questionnaire

Click here for Hugh Cox's Guide to RO Tactics

Click here for veteran's Essential Report Notes of each medical visit 


The veteran's filling in this medical visit form caused a Court remand in Scott v. Shinseki, 08-1014 (2010) because the veteran noted that that the VA exam did not include an EKG even though the VA alleged that the EKG took place. See citation below:


"Based on the medical examiner's report, the examination was performed in two parts on two different days, January 23, 2004, and February 20, 2004. The report references an EKG result from February 20, 2004; however, Mr. Scott stated in a sworn written statement dated October 8, 2004, that he did not have an EKG test on that day. R. at 1261, 1304-05. The Court notes that the actual EKG results are not contained in the record, only what purports to be an interpretation of the test results. See R. at 1311.

The Board decision does not address Mr.
Scott's sworn statement that the test was not conducted other than to say: "The veteran contends that he was not treated fairly during the examination . . . ." R. at 16. The Secretary also does not directly respond in his brief to Mr. Scott's argument that the EKG result referenced by the VA medical examiner could not be his, and was likely that of another patient. The Secretary's brief merely reiterates the Board's characterization of the statement: "Appellant . . . indicated in a statement of record that he was treated badly by Dr. Troutman at his examination." Secretary's Br. at 9. Then, the Secretary goes on to say: "[T]he Board did consider and address Appellant's allegation in the decision and concluded that the test results were 'generally consistent' with others of the record." Id. Neither the Board nor the Secretary has addressed Mr. Scott's assertion  [*8] that an EKG was not performed on February 20, 2004, as the VA examiner's report states.

   . . .

Because the Board did not discuss Mr. Scott's allegation in assessing the probative value of the February 20, 2004, medical examination, the Board failed in its duty to provide adequate reasons or bases for nonetheless relying on the medical examination report, and its obligation to determine whether VA has satisfied its duty to assist Mr. Scott by ensuring an adequate medical examination is provided."