to recover money already disbursed, see 38 U.S.C. §§ 5302, 5314, 5112(b)(6), the time spent on making these decisions, and then revoking benefits awarded and initiating recovery of payments, can never be reclaimed by the Secretary if a legal interpretation by this Court is later reversed. Cf. Adams v. Freedom Forge Corp., 204 F.3d 475, 484-85 (3rd Cir.2000) (“The irreparable harm requirement is met if a plaintiff demonstrates a significant risk that he or she will experience harm that cannot adequately be compensated after the fact by monetary damages.”). Second, occasionally a decision of this Court may invalidate the procedures used by the Secretary in a manner that would require a serious restructuring of the VA workforce. See, e.g., Colvin v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 171 (1991) (<HOLDING>). For a case on appeal to the Federal Circuit,
holding that county airport board and twenty board members in their representative capacities had sovereign immunity in suit for negligence holding that the district court was authorized to remand the proceedings to the board where the board failed to make required findings recognizing absolute immunity for attorneys and board members of the texas medical board holding that board panels may consider only independent medical evidence to support their findings resulting in va altering its longstanding practice of including members of the board with medical expertise on each panel and relying on their medical opinion in rendering board decisions recognizing absolute immunity for attorneys of the texas medical board