Loading decisions…
Loading decisions…
8,453 vetted Board decisions in 2008.
The Board has granted service connection for the veteran's actinic keratosis, finding that it is related to sun exposure during his military service.
The Board has remanded the case for further development, including assessing the impact of the veteran's medications on his ability to function and work prior to June 18, 2002.
The Board found that the veteran's current bilateral foot disabilities were not incurred in or aggravated by active duty service.
The veteran's claim for an increased evaluation of his service-connected discoid lupus erythematosus (DLE) is being remanded due to the need for a VA examination and proper notification under the Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000.
The veteran's chiropractic treatment for back pain from February 16, 2004 through April 19, 2004 was not authorized by VA and thus reimbursement for unauthorized medical expenses is denied.
The Board denied a rating in excess of 40 percent for the veteran's service-connected sacro-iliac strain, finding that his disability is productive of not more than 'severe' impairment.
The Board has determined that the veteran's iritis does not warrant a compensable rating, and his cervical spine disability is rated as 10% since February 1, 2001.
The Board has determined that the veteran's service-connected right and left knee chondromalacia of the patella warrant a 10 percent evaluation each, effective from May 5, 2005.
The Board found that the veteran's malignant lymphoma is not service-connected due to lack of participation in a radiation-risk activity and insufficient evidence linking the condition to military service.
The veteran is seeking service connection for residuals of a cerebral vascular accident as secondary to his service-connected PTSD, and also seeks an increased evaluation for his PTSD. The case must be remanded for further development.
The veteran's right hand disorder and residuals of myocardial infarction were caused by negligence at a VA facility, resulting in his suicide attempt. The Board finds that the VAMC was negligent and grants compensation benefits under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151.
The Board denied the appellant's claim for VA death benefits as a matter of law due to his not meeting eligibility requirements as a child of the deceased veteran.
The Board has remanded the case to the RO for consideration of new evidence and a supplemental statement of the case.
The Board denied an increased evaluation for the veteran's service-connected residuals of a gunshot wound to the right tibia and fibula with scars and shortening of leg, currently rated at 30 percent.
The veteran's claim for service connection for a left orchiectomy, claimed as a loss of the left testicle with impotency is being remanded due to the need for additional medical examination and review.
The veteran's service-connected bursitis of the right greater trochanter does not meet the criteria for a rating in excess of 10 percent, as her flexion is limited to no more than 30 degrees.
The veteran is granted an increased disability rating of 80 percent for narcolepsy effective July 25, 1996.,The veteran is granted TDIU effective June 27, 2000.
The Board is remanding the case to search for any previous claim of service connection for the cause of the veteran's death, and to provide additional notice under Dingess/Hartman v. Nicholson.
The Board found that the appellant and veteran were legally married but did not live together continuously prior to the veteran's death. The separation was due to the veteran's need for hospitalization and the appellant's financial constraints, leading to a legal separation in May 1985. As such, the claim for recognition as the surviving spouse of the veteran for VA death benefits is denied.
The Board finds that the criteria for a compensable rating under Diagnostic Code 9913 are not met due to the veteran's remaining teeth and their function, thus denying the claim.
← Back to Other conditions overview
We are not the VA. Veterans’ Rights is an independent resource built for veterans. We are not the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, not part of the government, and not endorsed by any government agency.
This is general information, not legal advice. For advice about your own situation, talk to a VA-accredited representative — many help for free.