Other conditions decisions — 2019

The Board has remanded the case due to an inadequate medical opinion regarding whether the Veteran's current brain injury is related to his service. The Veteran claims he developed a brain injury from boxing in service, but the VA examiner found no evidence of such injuries in his records and linked his current symptoms to hypertension medication or sleep apnea.

The Veteran's appeal of whether a substantive appeal was timely filed in response to the November 2010 statement of the case is denied.

The Board denied the Veteran's request for an effective date prior to April 3, 2015 for adding his spouse S.R. as a dependent to his VA disability compensation award.

The Board has remanded two issues: whether the debt created by removing the Veteran's former spouse, L.J., was validly created and entitlement to waiver of recovery of overpayment. The first issue is related to the validity of a debt claim, while the second involves a request for a waiver of an overpayment.

The appellant's income exceeded the maximum annual pension rate, resulting in her denial of VA death pension benefits.

The Board is remanding the case to clarify Niagara University's operating system for the Veteran's MBA studies from January 2015 to May 2015, as this information is needed to determine if additional educational assistance benefits should be provided.

The Board is remanding the case to clarify Niagara University's operating system for the Veteran's MBA studies from January 2015 to May 2015, as this information is needed to determine if additional educational assistance benefits should be provided.

The Board has granted an effective date of September 17, 2010 for the addition of the Veteran's spouse as his dependent to his award of VA disability compensation.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded for the VA to adjudicate his request for a waiver of overpayment created by removing his former spouse, V.S., and then readjudicate all issues.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for residuals of stomach surgery and repair, finding no current disability resulting from his in-service surgery.

The appellant cannot be recognized as the Veteran’s surviving spouse for the purposes of entitlement to DIC, accrued benefits, or non-service connected death pension. The Board denied these claims due to lack of eligibility under VA regulations.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to a lack of official exposure records and the need for additional development, including obtaining medical opinions and records.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to inadequate compliance with prior remand instructions and a need for further examination.

The Board denied service connection for the cause of death due to colorectal cancer, finding that there was no evidence linking it to service or a service-connected condition. The claims for exposure to ionized radiation and Agent Orange were also denied as there was insufficient evidence to support these connections.

The Board is remanding the case to obtain additional medical records and provide a VA opinion regarding whether the Veteran's service-connected ischemic heart disease contributed to his death, and if his exposure to herbicides in Vietnam is etiologically related to his neuroendocrine cancer.

The Veteran's claim for payment or reimbursement of the cost of private medical services received at Shands Medical Center SMC in Jacksonville, Florida from October 3, 2013 through October 5, 2013 was denied because it was not timely filed.

The Board denied the Veteran's request to reopen her claim for service connection for periodontal disease, finding that new and material evidence did not raise a reasonable possibility of substantiating the claim.

The Veteran's claim for VA educational benefits for on-the-job training prior to July 14, 2015 was denied as the application was received more than a year after completion of the program.

The Board denied service connection for loss of vision of the right eye, finding that the Veteran's current condition is not related to his military service.

The Veteran's surviving daughter is not recognized as a child eligible for VA benefits due to her age and the fact that she did not become permanently incapable of self-support before reaching the age of 18.