Other conditions decisions — 2005

The Board has determined that there is no evidence of a chronic disability related to the veteran's service, and thus denied his claim for service connection.

The Board has determined that the veteran's service-connected left knee disability, manifested by chondromalacia patella and patellar instability, warrants a separate 20 percent evaluation for limitation of flexion and another 20 percent evaluation for patellar instability. The current ratings are higher than what is warranted based on the evidence provided.

The Board has determined that the veteran's service-connected GI disability warrants a 60 percent rating, effective as of the date of this decision.

The veteran died from pneumonia, sepsis, and carcinoma of the lung. Service connection was not granted for any condition as they were not related to service or a service-connected disability.

The veteran's death was caused by malnutrition, which is presumed to have been incurred in service. The Board granted service connection for the cause of the veteran's death and dismissed the claim for dependency and indemnity compensation benefits under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1318.

The Board has determined that further development is required to determine if the veteran's death was caused by his service-connected conditions or due to VA treatment, and whether any negligence occurred. The case is being remanded for this purpose.

The veteran is seeking service connection for a skin rash, which he claims is related to his exposure to herbicides during service. The Board has determined that further development is needed due to the lack of medical opinions and records.

The Board found that the veteran's claims for additional compensation for dependents A.M., T.M., and B.C.B. were abandoned due to failure to provide required information within one year of being requested, as they had passed their 23rd birthdays and thus could no longer be considered dependent children.

The VA determined that the veteran's service-connected peptic ulcer disease, postoperative gastrectomy for gastric carcinoma does not warrant an increased rating beyond the current 40 percent evaluation.

The veteran's peritoneal adhesions are currently rated at 10 percent, but the Board finds that they do not meet the criteria for a higher rating based on the current evidence of record.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for a hernia disability, finding no competent medical evidence linking his current condition to his military service.

The Board found that the veteran does not currently have cardiomyopathy or PSVT, and thus denied an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for dilated cardiomyopathy secondary to paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia.

The Board found that the appellant intentionally and wrongfully caused her husband's death, preventing payment of VA benefits to her based on his death.

The veteran's claim for more than one annual clothing allowance was denied as the law only allows a single annual clothing allowance.

The veteran's varicose veins of the right leg are found to have had their clinical onset during service, and thus service connection is granted. The veteran does not meet the criteria for service connection for crushed knuckles on the right hand or jock itch due to disease or injury incurred in service.

The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete service records and unverified treatment history. The veteran's claim for service connection for right leg injuries will be reconsidered after obtaining necessary information.

The Board has determined that the veteran's bad faith in creating the overpayment of compensation benefits was not demonstrated, and thus the appeal is granted.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for an increased disability rating in excess of 30 percent for dermatophytosis of both hands and feet, finding that his condition did not warrant a higher rating under either the former or revised criteria.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151, finding that his bilateral ear disorder and chronic laryngitis did not result from VA carelessness, negligence, or lack of proper skill.

The Board is remanding the case due to a lack of new and material evidence, but also because it needs to ensure that all provisions of VCAA are properly applied in the development of the claim. The appellant must be informed about what type of evidence is needed to overcome the reason for the original denial.