Other conditions decisions — 2013

The Board has granted the Veteran's claim for compensation benefits pursuant to 38 U.S.C.A. � 1151 due to a failure to timely diagnose and properly evaluate his right eye retinal detachment, which resulted in vision loss.

The Veteran's claim for disability compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 was denied due to the lack of evidence showing that his injuries were caused by VA treatment.

The Board denied service connection for angioedema of the lips, finding that the Veteran's condition was not incurred or aggravated by active duty and that her pre-existing condition did not worsen during service.

The Veteran does not have a diagnosed neurological disability affecting the bilateral hands, and his symptoms are better explained by other conditions. His claim for service connection is denied.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including adjudicating the claim of service connection for eczema and dermatitis. The mood disorder claim will be readjudicated on both direct and secondary bases.

The Board found that the Veteran's current neurologic complaints are not related to a cold injury, and denied his claim for service connection.

The Board has remanded the issue of service connection for skin cancer, including basal cell and squamous cell carcinomas, to the RO for additional development. The Veteran's claim remains pending.

The Veteran's right elbow disability has been evaluated as 20 percent disabling, and the Board finds that a higher rating is not warranted based on the evidence of record.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's gout is related to his service, specifically his period of active duty from August 2004 to December 2005, and it was caused by or a result of any aspect of his service, including the medication Maxzide taken for his hypertension.

The Board denied increased evaluations for the Veteran's right leg varicose veins and gouty arthritis, finding that the evidence did not warrant a higher evaluation based on the current manifestations of these conditions.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for further development, including scheduling a VA examination and obtaining additional medical records. The issues of service connection for his leg disorders and special monthly compensation based on the need for regular aid and attendance or at the housebound rate are still pending.

The Board found that the appellant's income exceeded the maximum annual pension rate for death pension benefits as of June 1, 2008, and thus terminated her VA non-service connected death pension benefits effective that date.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for a brain disorder, finding that there was no evidence of a current disability related to his military service.

The Board has determined that the appellant is not a veteran and therefore ineligible for one-time payment from the Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund.

The Veteran is seeking service connection for anemia, which she asserts was incurred during her military service. The Board has determined that additional development is needed to properly adjudicate the claim.

The Board finds that the Veteran does not have a current skin disability, and there is no evidence linking any past or present skin condition to service. The claim for service connection is denied.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for additional development, including obtaining quality-assurance records and treatment records. The claims of compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 for rectal fissure and whether new and material evidence has been received to reopen a claim for service connection for a bilateral leg condition are being referred back to the RO.

The Board has reopened the Veteran's claim for service connection for a low back disability, but further development is needed to determine if there is a relationship between his current condition and his military service.

The November 17, 1965 decision upheld the initial noncompensable rating for residuals of a chipped fracture of the right index finger. The Veteran argues that the correct diagnostic code (DC) should have been used to assign a 10% evaluation.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development to ensure that his hydronephrosis disability is properly evaluated.