Other conditions decisions — 2001

The Board denied the claimant's request to be recognized as the veteran's surviving spouse for VA purposes, finding that she did not meet the legal requirements.

The Board denied service connection for the cause of the veteran's death, finding that his lung disability did not have a causal relationship to his active service or any service-connected condition.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for an increased rating and his CUE claim. The veteran was awarded a 40% disability evaluation for residuals of a gunshot wound, but the Board found no clear and unmistakable error in the February 1974 rating decision.

The veteran is granted an effective date of June 28, 1995 for his 100% rating under the provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 and 38 C.F.R. § 3.383 for the retinal detachment of his left eye due to cataract surgery at a VA medical center, with an additional nuclear sclerotic cataract of the right eye causing bilateral blindness.

The Board found that the overpayment was properly created due to the veteran's failure to notify VA of his divorce, and denied recovery as it would not be against equity and good conscience.

The Board dismissed the motion for clear and unmistakable error (CUE) without prejudice, as the moving party failed to clearly and specifically set forth the alleged CUE or errors of fact or law in the February 1966 decision.

The Board denied service connection for residuals of a right thumb injury and an ulcer, finding no current evidence of these conditions.

The Board denied an increased evaluation for post-traumatic stress disorder, currently rated at 50 percent. The evidence did not show symptoms of severity warranting a higher rating.

The Board has denied the claim for service connection for cause of death, finding that it was not well grounded and that the veteran's death was not due to exposure to Agent Orange.

The Board has determined that the veteran's right eye optic atrophy, which is a specific injury from an in-service incident, was incurred during service and grants service connection for this condition.

The Board has determined that the veteran's suicide was due to mental unsoundness and not willful misconduct, thus granting service connection for the cause of his death.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for a compensable evaluation for a fracture of the right zygoma, service connection for weight gain secondary to medications prescribed for his service-connected disabilities, and service connection for arthritis of the upper back. The evidence did not support these claims.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for recognition as the veteran's surviving spouse for VA benefits purposes due to inconsistencies in her statements regarding when their alleged common law marriage began and whether she lived continuously with the veteran during his hospitalizations.

The Board has determined that the veteran's bilateral eye disorder was not incurred in or aggravated by active service. For his hearing loss, a compensable rating is denied prior to March 13, 2001 and a compensable rating of 10% is granted from March 13, 2001 onwards.

The Board denied the reopening of a claim for service connection for the cause of the veteran's death due to lack of new and material evidence, while also denying the original claim.

The Board has granted an effective date of March 11, 2001 for the award of a compensable evaluation for residuals of thoracotomy, status post pneumothorax, right lung and service connection for nerve damage secondary to thoracotomy, right chest wall.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for increased evaluations for bilateral defective hearing and bilateral tympanic membrane perforation as there is no evidence of a compensable rating in the applicable VA schedule.

The VA determined that the veteran's TMJ dysfunction does not warrant a compensable evaluation, as his interincisal range is beyond 40 mm and lateral excursion ranges are within normal limits.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for an increased evaluation of his stomach disorder, currently rated at 40 percent.

The Board denied the appellant's claim to reopen his eligibility for VA benefits due to lack of new and material evidence, as well as the fact that his character of discharge barred him from receiving such benefits.