Henderson v. Shinseki

Background

David Henderson, a veteran who had been denied supplemental in‑home care benefits by the VA, filed a notice of appeal to the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims 15 days late. The Veterans Court first dismissed the appeal, later reconsidered it, and after this Court’s decision in Bowles concluded the 120‑day deadline required jurisdictional treatment and dismissed Henderson’s case. The Federal Circuit affirmed that dismissal, and Henderson appealed to this Court.

Reasoning

The Court addressed whether the 120‑day deadline should be treated as “jurisdictional” — a label that would let courts refuse to hear late appeals regardless of excuses. The majority explained that many filing deadlines are ordinary claim‑processing rules, not jurisdictional limits on a court’s authority. The opinion examined the text and placement of 38 U.S.C. § 7266(a), compared veterans’ review procedures to other administrative schemes, and emphasized Congress’s long history of construing veterans’ benefits rules generously in veterans’ favor. Because § 7266 does not clearly show a congressional intent to attach the harsh jurisdictional consequence, the Court concluded that the 120‑day deadline is not jurisdictional.

Real world impact

The Court reversed the Federal Circuit and sent the case back for further proceedings. The decision means the 120‑day limit remains an important procedural rule, but it does not automatically bar a late appeal; courts can consider whether exceptions or equitable relief apply. The opinion left questions about specific excuses, such as equitable tolling, to be addressed on remand.