Depression decisions — 2009

The Veteran's anxiety/depression disability was manifested during active duty service and the Board has determined that it is incurred in line of duty. The Veteran's bilateral ankle disability, as diagnosed, is not related to his military service.

The Veteran's initial evaluation for depressive disorder was granted at a 10 percent rating, effective April 24, 2004. The Board found that the current symptoms of mild memory impairment and depressed mood more nearly approximate a 30 percent disability rating.

The Board has denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for PTSD and Major Depression, finding that there is no evidence of a nexus between current psychiatric disabilities and his military service.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's claimed psychiatric disorders, left ankle and knee disorders, and residuals of a concussion, cervical spine injury, and back injury are not related to her military service.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been received to reopen the Veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD. The appeal is granted to this extent only.

The Board found that the Veteran's psychiatric disabilities, including PTSD, were not incurred or aggravated during active service. The evidence did not establish a link between his current symptoms and in-service stressors.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence regarding whether the Veteran's current psychiatric conditions are related to service.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for presbyopia was denied. The claims for PTSD, an acquired psychiatric disorder (other than PTSD), tinnitus, residuals of a left foot injury, degenerative joint disease of the lumbar spine, and a condition of the eyes (other than presbyopia) are pending.

The Veteran's appeal for an earlier effective date for the grant of service connection for major depressive disorder is denied as there was no legal entitlement to such a claim.

The Veteran's PTSD and major depressive disorder are found to be related to his service, with the latter being secondary to the former.

The Board found no nexus between the Veteran's service and her current acquired psychiatric disorder, including PTSD and MPD. The claim was denied.

The Board found no evidence of a current psychiatric disorder in service and noted that the Veteran's post-service treatment records indicate he first received psychiatric care over six years after discharge. The VA examiner concluded that his current psychiatric disability was likely caused by alcohol and drug dependence, rather than military service.

The Board denied service connection for the Veteran's claimed depression/major depression as not incurred or aggravated during active military service, and was not secondary to a service-connected disability.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for initial evaluation of PTSD and service connection for hypertension and depression, finding that the evidence did not support a higher rating or service connection.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, including PTSD, is being remanded due to the need for a VA examination at the nearest VAMC in Arkansas.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including verification of in-service stressors and examination to determine current disabilities.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for a panic disorder, bilateral hearing loss, and bilateral tinnitus were denied. The Veteran was granted service connection for bilateral tinnitus but assigned a 10 percent rating.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim of service connection for a psychiatric disability, including PTSD. The evidence did not show an in-service occurrence or stressor related to service and there was no direct link between his current psychiatric disabilities and service.

The Board found no evidence of a psychiatric disability during service and denied the Veteran's claims for service connection, TDIU, and pension benefits.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development and adjudication due to conflicting responses from an examiner's report.