Other conditions decisions — 2007

The Board has denied the veteran's claim for service connection for arthritis of the hips, finding that there is no current disability and thus no basis to grant the claim.

The Board denied service connection for soft tissue injuries of the hips, but granted it for arthritis of the hips. The veteran is not eligible for attorney fees from past-due benefits resulting from the grant of service connection for soft tissue injuries.

The Board has determined that the veteran's cancer of the larynx and vocal cords is due to radiation exposure in service, and thus grants service connection for this condition.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for recognition as the veteran's surviving spouse for VA death benefits due to her incarceration at the time of the veteran's death and lack of continuous cohabitation.

The Board found that the appellant did not meet the criteria for recognition as the veteran's surviving spouse for VA death benefits purposes due to her marriage being less than one year prior to the veteran's death and no children born of or before the marriage.

The Board has granted a rating of 30 percent for the veteran's service-connected left flatfoot and degenerative joint disease, effective July 13, 2004.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has not been received to reopen the claim for service connection for the cause of the veteran's death, resulting in a denial.

The veteran's claim for an increased rating for his service-connected residuals of gastrectomy is being remanded due to the need for additional development, including obtaining updated medical records and scheduling a VA examination.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for residuals of colon cancer due to asbestos exposure, finding no persuasive medical evidence linking his current condition to his military service.

The Board has determined that the appellant's discharge from active service was under dishonorable conditions, which constitutes a bar to VA benefits.

The VA determined that the veteran's current left ear disability was not caused by carelessness, negligence, or lack of proper skill on the part of VA during treatment at the Asheville VAMC. The Board found no evidence to support the claim and concluded that the preponderance of the evidence is against the veteran's claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151.

The Board determined that the appellant's countable income exceeded the maximum allowable rate for a surviving spouse with no children, thus denying her claim for improved death pension benefits.

The Board found that the veteran's substance abuse was not incurred in service and denied both his claim for service connection and his claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151.

The Board found that the appellant is not entitled to recognition as the veteran's surviving spouse for VA purposes due to legal impediments in her previous marriage.

The Board has determined that the veteran's current bilateral foot hammertoes are not related to his active military service and therefore denied both claims for service connection.

The veteran's claimed conditions of dysphasia, CREST syndrome, and limited scleroderma (claimed as esophageal dysfunction) were not shown during service or for many years thereafter. The Board found no evidence to support a connection between the current disabilities and military service, including exposure to ionizing radiation.

The Board found that the veteran's post-operative residuals of a right testicular cancer were not incurred in or aggravated by his first period of service, and concluded that it pre-existed his second period of service. The claim was denied.

The Board has denied the veteran's claim for an increased rating for residuals of an umbilical hernia, currently rated as 20 percent disabling.

The VA denied the appellant's claim for service connection for the cause of her husband's death due to lack of evidence linking his cancer with military service or exposure to radiation.

The Board has denied the appellant's claim for apportionment of her spouse's VA pension benefits due to a lack of evidence confirming their marital status and termination.