Other conditions decisions — 2020

The Veteran and the appellant were legally divorced, and there is no evidence of an attempted remarriage. The Board denies recognition as the surviving spouse for VA death pension and accrued benefits purposes.

The Board has remanded the case due to a duty to assist error, requiring a VA examination to determine the nature and etiology of any jaw disorder that may be present. The Veteran is presumed to have been in sound condition with respect to his jaw when he entered service.

The Veteran's daughter filed a claim for accrued benefits, but the appeal is denied as there are no unpaid VA benefits due to her at the time of the Veteran's death.

The Board has granted service connection for esophageal adenocarcinoma, finding that the Veteran's time in active service is etiologically related to his condition.

The Veteran's cause of death was respiratory failure due to heart failure and pneumonia, which were not service-connected.,The appellant did not meet the requirements for Dependency and Indemnity Compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1318 as her spouse.

The Board dismissed the appeal because the appellant did not file a timely Notice of Disagreement (NOD) within 60 days after receiving the August 2019 apportionment decision.

The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for dependency benefits based on his child's school attendance is denied as there was no valid claim filed within the one-year period.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for athlete's foot is granted, and his claim for service connection for tinnitus remains pending.

The Board denied the claim for nonservice-connected death pension benefits because the veteran's spouse did not qualify as a 'veteran' due to lack of service connection for any disability during their periods of active duty, inactive duty training, or ACDUTRA.

The Veteran's net worth is not considered excessive for the purpose of establishing entitlement to VA non-service-connected pension benefits, and his appeal based on this issue is granted.

The Veteran's claim for a higher rating of right ulnar nerve entrapment was granted in December 2018. The effective date is August 1, 2012. Attorney fees were awarded based on past-due benefits from the effective date to March 2, 2019.

The Board denied the Veteran's appeal as he was not reasonably discharging his responsibility for supporting his dependent child A.W. The decision is based on the evidence of record at the time of the August 2019 rating decision.

The veteran's spouse has withdrawn her appeals for accrued benefits and death pension benefits, thus the issues are dismissed.

The Veteran's service-connected unspecified trauma related disorder is rated at 50 percent, but no higher. The rating reflects occupational and social impairment with reduced reliability and productivity.

The Veteran's claim for a rating in excess of 20 percent for bilateral lagophthalmos and his TDIU prior to April 17, 2018 were both denied. The Board found that the Veteran did not meet the criteria for a higher disability rating or TDIU based on service-connected disabilities alone.

The Board has granted service connection for a thoracic strain, finding that the evidence is at least in equipoise that it began during active duty.

The Veteran's lumbar spine disability and impairment of the right lower extremity as a residual of epidural abscess of the thoracic spine are granted with specific ratings, while TDIU for the period from March 28, 2007 to April 13, 2007 is granted.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for an initial rating in excess of 20 percent for right eye amblyopia prior to February 26, 2019 and a rating in excess of 30 percent from that date. The additional evidence must be reviewed by the RO.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for a bilateral hand disability, finding that there was no medical evidence linking his current condition to his military service or service-connected cervical spine disability.

The Board found that the appellant's single offense of marijuana possession did not constitute willful and persistent misconduct, thus his OTH discharge is not a bar to VA benefits.