Loading decisions…
Loading decisions…
8,170 vetted Board decisions in 2014.
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for diverticulitis, finding that there was no evidence of a direct relationship to his military service. The effective date for dependency benefits for his stepchildren remains October 14, 2009.
The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for service connection of residuals of a shell fragment wound (SFW) of the left thumb was granted, with the effective date set at March 17, 2009.
The Veteran's son is not eligible for a one-time payment from the FVEC Fund as he does not meet the eligibility criteria.
The Board has denied the appellant's request to reopen her claim of being considered the surviving spouse of the Veteran for VA benefits, finding that no new and material evidence was submitted.
The Board has determined that the submitted evidence is not new and material, thus denying the Veteran's request to reopen his claim of service connection for the residuals of a right elbow fracture.
The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for the VA to obtain his Social Security Administration (SSA) records and consider them in their decision on TDIU.
The Board has determined that there is no legal basis for an effective date earlier than July 22, 2010 for the award of TDIU benefits.
The Veteran's claim for compensation under the provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. � 1151 is being remanded due to the need for a VA examination to determine if his worsened visual acuity after an eye examination in July 2008 was caused by VA care, and whether it was proximately caused by negligence or lack of proper skill.
The appellant's spouse did not have qualifying service, and therefore is not eligible for nonservice-connected death benefits.
The Veteran's appeal is denied as he is not entitled to educational assistance benefits under Chapter 33 (Post-9/11 GI Bill) for a non-college degree program completed at Kaplan Professional Schools from November 2010 to December 2010.
The Board has determined that the appellant is not entitled to recognition as the surviving spouse of the Veteran for VA death pension benefits purposes.
The Veteran's claim for VA Post 9/11 GI Bill education benefits was denied because his creditable service did not meet the required 30 days of continuous active duty under VA regulations. The case is REMANDED to request additional information from the Veteran and official sources regarding his enlistment terms and verify with the Department of Defense.
The Board found that the Veteran's current neurological disorder associated with his feet is not shown to be causally or etiologically related to his active military service.
The Board has determined that the Veteran's duodenal ulcer does not meet the criteria for a higher rating, as it is currently rated at 10 percent and does not demonstrate symptoms warranting a higher evaluation.
The Board has determined that the Veteran's current diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus is related to his military service, and thus grants service connection for this condition.
The Board has determined that the Appellant is not entitled to recognition as the Veteran's surviving spouse for VA death benefits purposes due to her divorce from the Veteran prior to his death.
The Board has remanded the case for an additional VA examination to determine if the Veteran's left foot symptoms are related to her service-connected left Achilles tendonitis and whether she has a separate disability of the left foot.
The Veteran's service-connected cold injury of the left and right lower extremities do not render him unable to secure or follow substantially gainful employment.
The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for pension benefits was denied as the RO applied the 'liberalizing law' rule and assigned March 1, 2011 as the effective date. There is no basis to assign an earlier effective date.
The Board has remanded the case due to a failure to assist in developing evidence for the claim of service connection for tingling and numbness in the upper extremities, which is claimed as secondary to diabetes mellitus.
← 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.