Announcing the 2023 Robert M. Dell Prize for Extraordinary Pro Bono Service

In 2014, we launched the Robert M. Dell Prize for Extraordinary Pro Bono Service, an annual recognition awarded to a Latham lawyer or team who has demonstrated an exceptional commitment to pro bono work.

This year, we are thrilled to recognize the cross-office team that secured a precedent-setting victory that will have a widespread impact on veterans seeking disability ratings and medical retirements in the US.

Jason Sissel is an Army and Marine combat veteran who was injured while deployed in service of Operation Iraqi Freedom. After his combat injuries, it took Mr. Sissel 16 months of rehab to walk again. Mr. Sissel was then medically separated from the Army, as he was unable to perform the physical duties required in combat. However, the Army’s evaluation board gave Mr. Sissel only a 10% disability rating, denying him the 30% required for medical retirement. Thus, after 10 years of military service, Mr. Sissel was forced to leave the Army without any retirement compensation or the additional medical benefits that come with medical retirement.

Mr. Sissel initially appealed his decision to the Physical Disability Board of Review (PDBR), which was established by the Wounded Warrior’s Act specifically to correct such low disability ratings from the Army. After the PDBR denied Mr. Sissel’s request, he sought help from the National Veterans Legal Service Program, which reached out to Latham for assistance challenging the decision in federal district court.

Under the leadership of associate Bradley Hyde, the Latham team spent six years working on Mr. Sissel’s behalf, including filing a complaint in the District Court for the District of Columbia under the Administrative Procedure Act seeking to correct the PDBR’s decision, preparing briefings in support of remanded proceedings, seeking summary judgment at the District Court level, and subsequently appealing the District Court’s initial denial of relief to the D.C. Circuit.

In a July 2023 published decision, the D.C. Circuit sided with our client in full. Along with holding that the prior decisions were contrary to law, the court rejected the federal government’s request to review these types of military decisions under a heightened deferential standard. The court also agreed with the firm’s interpretation of the governing Army regulation requiring all listed “unfitting” conditions to be appropriately rated — a decision that will endure for other veterans with similar claims across the US.

Watch this short video to learn more about this hard-fought, precedent setting matter and its importance to US veterans.