Other conditions decisions — 2020

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for a skin disability, finding no evidence of a disease presumed service connected in a veteran exposed to herbicide agents and no evidence of a skin disability related or associated with service including presumed herbicide agent exposure.

The Board denied the Veteran's request for a waiver of overpayment of VA compensation benefits, finding that the debt was valid and that recovery would not be against equity and good conscience.

The Board denied service connection for right hip disorder and left hip disorder, finding no evidence of in-service injury or disease that caused the current conditions.

The appeal was dismissed as the appellant requested to withdraw it due to a subsequent decision resolving the disagreement.

The Board has determined that additional evidence is needed to determine the relationship between the Veteran's claimed conditions and his military service, including exposure to contaminants at Camp Lejeune. The VA will obtain relevant medical records and schedule the Veteran for examinations to address these issues.

The Board dismissed the appeal because the Veteran did not timely file a Notice of Disagreement in response to the apportionment decision, and thus lacked jurisdiction to consider the merits.

The Veteran's wife seeks an apportionment of the VA compensation benefits not paid to him during his incarceration. The Board finds that the appellant has not demonstrated an individual need for these benefits and denies the claim.

The Board dismissed the appeal because the appellant requested withdrawal of the issue on appeal before a decision was made.

The Veteran's cause of death, complications from cocaine and opiate toxicity, was not related to his military service. The Board found no evidence linking the cause of death to any service-connected disability.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for the cause of his death, finding that Alzheimer's dementia was not related to his military service.

The Veteran's left eye disability is rated at 20 percent, and a separate 30 percent rating for asymmetry of the eyes is granted.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to the need for a medical examination and opinion regarding the nature and etiology of the Veteran's skin condition.

The Board has remanded the case due to a duty to assist error, requiring an additional VA examination to determine if the Veteran's stroke and right eye disability are related to his service-connected conditions.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for service connection for peripheral vascular disease of the bilateral upper and lower extremities, as well as his claim for TDIU due to conflicting medical evidence regarding these conditions.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for a bladder disability, including overactive bladder, finding that there was no causal relationship between her current diagnosis and in-service UTIs. The Board determined that the preponderance of evidence did not support the claim.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for malaria is remanded due to insufficient evidence and the need for a VA examination.

The Veteran's appeal involves his claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C. §1151 due to medical care provided by the VA Medical Center in Houston, Texas from September 2011 to March 2013. The Board has determined that further development is necessary and a new examination is required.

The Board has remanded the claims for esophageal cancer and cause of death due to atrial fibrillation, including a review of in-service exposure to black oil, jet fuel, and herbicide agents. The Veteran's service connection claim is based on new evidence.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient medical opinions regarding whether the Veteran's gallbladder disease is related to her service, including her deployment in the Southwest Asia theater of operations.

The Veteran's appeal for higher ratings for left foot hallux valgus and right foot hallux valgus was denied. The Veteran is currently receiving a 10 percent rating for his left foot hallux valgus, which is the maximum schedular rating permitted for unilateral hallux valgus absent amputation of the great toe with removal of the metatarsal head. For his right foot hallux valgus, he received a compensable rating.