Other conditions decisions — 2023

The Board has granted service connection for esophageal cancer, finding that the evidence is at least evenly balanced as to whether the Veteran's esophageal cancer was caused by his exposure to herbicide agents during service. As a result, the claim is granted.

The Board has decided to remand the Veteran's claim for service connection for varicose veins, bilateral legs due to additional development being necessary. The issues on appeal are whether his current condition is related to military service or secondary to a service-connected condition.

The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete medical records and inadequate examination reports, particularly regarding the severity of the Veteran's CVS symptoms and its impact on employment.

The Board has decided that the Veteran's right inguinoscrotal hernia may be related to his service-connected left inguinal hernia, but more evidence is needed for a final decision.

The Board has ordered the case to be remanded for additional development, including obtaining updated VA treatment records and scheduling a VA examination. The Veteran's service-connected residuals of a fractured sternum with costochondritis and shortness of breath need to be evaluated during flareups.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including a medical opinion regarding presumed exposure to herbicide agents and its potential impact on the Veteran's death. The claims are also intertwined with an accrued benefits claim, which must be addressed before final decisions can be made.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded due to the need for additional records and an audit of his VA compensation account during FY 2016.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date of July 7, 2014 for a 10% rating for his service-connected pilonidal cyst due to lack of evidence of an unadjudicated claim prior to that date.

The Veteran's adjustment disorder with depressed and anxious mood resulted in occupational and social impairment, but not to the extent that it would warrant a higher rating. The VA has granted a 50% disability evaluation for this period.

The Veteran withdrew their appeal regarding the overpayment of VA spousal dependency benefits, so the case is dismissed.

The Veteran's claim for a higher rating for her service-connected anemia (also claimed as iron deficiency) is remanded due to the need for additional medical opinions and consideration of extraschedular criteria.

The Veteran's vocal cords disability was denied for an initial compensable rating prior to March 21, 2012 and a higher rating from that date. The Board found the evidence did not support increased ratings based on current symptoms.

The Board has determined that additional information is needed regarding the financial and employment status of C.D. and A.D., as well as their marital history, to determine if they can be considered children for dependency compensation purposes.

The Board has remanded the case for a determination on whether the Veteran's TDIU claim should be evaluated under an extraschedular rating, as there is a possibility that the criteria have been met.

The Board dismissed the appeal due to the appellant's death, as claims do not survive their deaths.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient medical opinions regarding the relationship between the Veteran's bilateral athletes' feet and his service-connected bilateral pes planus, as well as the onset of the condition during service.

The Veteran's appeal has been dismissed due to their death. The Board does not have jurisdiction to adjudicate the merits of this case.

The Veteran's child, J.V., is seeking recognition as the Veteran's child for VA purposes based on permanent incapacity for self-support prior to reaching age 18. The appeal involves obtaining her Social Security Administration (SSA) records.

The Veteran's claim for an increased rating for residuals of a head trauma with post-concussion syndrome was denied because he did not report for the required VA examination without providing good cause.

The Board has remanded the case due to a lack of compliance with previous remand instructions regarding assessing additional functional impairment during flare-ups. The Veteran is asked to provide details about his left ankle disability related flare-ups.