Ruling Denies Veterans Use of Attorneys : High Court Upholds 19th-Century Law Limiting Fees to $10

WASHINGTON —  The Supreme Court today upheld a 19th-Century law that effectively denies veterans the right to hire lawyers in seeking federal death and disability benefits.

By a 6-3 vote, the justices ruled the 1862 law does not violate the constitutional rights of veterans.

The statute places a $10 limit on lawyers fees when veterans apply for service-connected death and disability benefits from the Veterans’ Administration.

There are about 28 million veterans in the United States and veterans’ groups say there are at least 30,000 disputed claims each year.

Justice William H. Rehnquist, writing for the court, said the fee limitation was enacted by Congress to protect servicemen and women by assuring they would not have to split benefits with a lawyer.

In a dissenting opinion, Justice John Paul Stevens said, “The court does not appreciate the value of individual liberty.” He said there are “at least some complicated cases” in which a lawyer would help protect the veteran’s interest and could be of service to the government in organizing facts and clarifying issues.

The fee limitation law does not prevent lawyers from volunteering their help to veterans. But veterans’ groups said in practice few attorneys will work for $10 in time-consuming and complicated cases.

The law was challenged by groups seeking compensation for veterans exposed to atomic bomb explosions and who suffered injuries or psychological trauma in Vietnam.

Today’s ruling overturned a federal judge’s decision that the fee limitation was “paternalistic” and violated veterans’ rights of free association.

The Reagan Administration defended the law as a shield against greedy lawyers who would siphon off benefits from the veterans they represented.

Today, the Supreme Court agreed with the Administration that it is important that the claims be settled in an informal and non-adversarial process.

Congress has been considering eliminating the fee limit but has not passed any legislation.