Hypertension (high blood pressure) Board decisions

The Board denied the appellant's claim for special monthly pension benefits due to her income exceeding the statutory limit, and also denied her claim based on unemployability due to her disabilities. The case is remanded for a statement of the case regarding these issues.

The Board denied service connection for various conditions, including back injury, knee injuries, leg injuries, appendectomy residuals, hypertension, left elbow disability, and varicose veins. The decision found no evidence of a nexus between these conditions and service.

The Board found that the veteran's cause of death (renal disease) and underlying condition (hypertension) were not related to his military service, thus denying the claim for service connection.

The Board found that the veteran does not have any of the claimed conditions as a result of his service, to include on a presumptive basis, or on the basis of aggravation.

The Board found the veteran's claim for service connection for hypertension not well grounded and denied it.

The Board has ordered the case back to the RO for further development and readjudication due to new evidence submitted by the veteran's attorney.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for low back disability and hypertension, finding that there was no competent medical evidence linking these conditions to his military service.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for a fungus condition and hypertension, finding no new and material evidence to reopen the fungus condition claim. The hypertension claim was not well-grounded due to lack of medical evidence.

The Board has dismissed the veteran's claim for service connection for hypertension as his appeal was not perfected.

The veteran's claims for increased evaluations for bilateral hearing loss, hypertension, cervical spine arthritis, and thoracic spine arthritis were denied as the evidence did not support a higher rating under the applicable VA rating criteria.

The veteran's cause of death was due to hypertension, a service-connected disability. The appellant is granted basic eligibility for Dependents' Educational Assistance.

The Board has determined that the veteran's claims for service connection are well-grounded and have been granted. The veteran is now entitled to service connection for headaches, depression, pseudofolliculitis barbae, hypertension, and a gastrointestinal disorder secondary to medication.

The Board found that the appellant was not permanently incapable of self-support at age 18, as he had various jobs and was enrolled in school. Therefore, his claim for VA benefits based on being a 'child' due to permanent incapacity prior to age 18 was denied.

The Board denied the claim for service connection for hypertension and hypertensive cardiovascular disease, finding that there was no well-grounded evidence to support the claim.

The Board denied service connection for a skin rash, PTSD, and hypertension. The veteran's claim for hypertension was not well-grounded as he had high blood pressure at the time of discharge.

The veteran's claims for service connection for various conditions, including an eye condition, heart disorder, GERD, hypertension, recurrent headaches, and intestinal disorder are not well-grounded. The Board denied these claims as the evidence does not support a finding of in-service disease or injury that could be linked to current disabilities.

The Board has ordered additional development to assess the veteran's disabilities and determine his eligibility for special monthly pension due to need for aid and attendance or housebound status.

The Board has granted the appellant's request for an extension of time to file a substantive appeal on his claims for service connection for hypertension, right shoulder disability, and cervical spine disability.

The Board has found that the veteran's cervical spondylosis is service-connected, but his hypertension was not shown to be related to service.

The veteran's claims for service connection were denied in October 1995, and she did not appeal the decision. In June 1997, she submitted copies of her service medical records to reopen her claim, but the RO did not prepare a rating decision as there was no jurisdiction due to the finality of the previous denial.