Migraines & headaches Board decisions

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for service connection for a cervical spine disorder, headache disorder, and an acquired psychiatric disorder. The evidence did not show that these conditions were incurred in or aggravated by military service.

The Board found no evidence linking the veteran's current migraine headaches to his service, and thus denied his claim for service connection.

The veteran's service connection claim for stress incontinence of the bladder is granted. The other claims are addressed in the REMAND portion of this decision.

The Board found that the veteran timely filed a notice of disagreement with the September 2001 rating decision, which reinstated his appeal on all issues except for service connection.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection due to lack of evidence linking his claimed conditions to active duty.

The Board has remanded the case due to the need for notification and development of evidence, including scheduling a hearing.

The Board denied all service connection claims, including those for skin disorders and other conditions.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development due to inadequate examination and incomplete evidence. The veteran is seeking service connection for hypertension, headaches, arthritis of the lumbar spine, dental trauma from service, and a right index finger fracture.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for his headaches, residuals of head trauma. The disability is rated as 10 percent disabling based on purely subjective complaints such as headache.

The Board found that there is no evidence of a current chronic acquired disorder manifested by headaches and denied the claim for service connection.

The Board has determined that the veteran's service-connected dysthymic disorder warrants a 100 percent disability rating, effective from November 7, 1996.

The Board denied the veteran's claims of service connection for right wrist disorder, epidermophytosis (claimed as punctuate plantar and palmar keratoderma), chronic headaches, back disorder, and stomach disorder. The decision also addressed whether new and material evidence had been submitted to reopen these claims.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for an initial rating in excess of 30 percent for post-traumatic headaches, finding that the evidence did not show very frequent, completely prostrating and prolonged attacks of headaches that are productive of severe economic inadaptability.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining service medical records and VA clinic records.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the inextricably intertwined nature of his service connection claim for a brain malignancy and his claim under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 for headaches, vision problems, and memory loss resulting from surgical procedures for treatment of a brain tumor.

The Board has determined that the veteran's bilateral hearing loss is related to his period of military service and grants service connection for this condition. The issues regarding migraine headaches and hypertension are remanded for further development.

The Board has granted service connection for chronic hypertension and a chronic headache disorder. Service connection is denied for left ear hearing loss disability, chronic tinnitus, and a chronic gastrointestinal disorder to include gastroenteritis and gastritis.

The veteran's claims for increased evaluations of her service-connected conditions were denied. The RO found that the current ratings adequately reflected the severity of her disabilities.

The Board denied the veteran's claims to reopen his previously-denied service connection claims for an acquired psychiatric disability (to include PTSD) and residuals of a head injury (to include headaches).

The Board denied the veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for service connection of residuals of a head injury with post concussion headaches, finding that no new and material evidence had been submitted to reopen the previously denied claim.