Other conditions decisions — 2023

The Veteran's appeal of the apportionment of his VA disability compensation benefits on behalf of his child, C.B., is denied due to insufficient evidence showing undue hardship caused by the apportionment.

The Veteran's appeal involves issues related to dependent pay for his daughter S.M. and an earlier effective date for additional dependent benefits. The AOJ must review the accounting information, determine the correct period for the award of child S.M., and consider the VA Form 21-674 received in November 2008.

The Veteran's claims for an increased rating for her left clavicle fracture and for TDIU are being remanded due to the need for a new VA examination to assess the severity of her disability, as well as consideration of all evidence since the April 2019 statement of the case.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient medical opinion regarding whether the Veteran's delusional disorder is related to his service, specifically the racial harassment he experienced during military service.

The Board denied the Veteran's request for a waiver of overpayment of $1,608.30 in VA compensation benefits due to lack of fault on the Veteran's part and found that repayment would not cause undue hardship or defeat the purpose of the benefit.

The Board has remanded the case due to a failure to obtain all relevant private treatment records. The Veteran is required to provide necessary identifying information and authorizations for these records.

The Board has remanded the case for an additional examination to determine the nature and etiology of the Veteran's liver disability, including whether it is related to service or caused by his service-connected hepatitis.

The Board has remanded the case due to issues related to the Appellant's service discharge and its impact on VA benefits. The decision is pending further development of evidence.

The Board has determined that the remand was not fully complied with and is therefore remanding both issues of housebound-in-fact status and need for special aid and attendance care.

The Veteran's acquired neck condition is being remanded for further evaluation and evidence collection.

The Board has granted a 40 percent rating for the Veteran's bilateral mandibular osteotomy with DJD of bilateral TMJ, finding that his inter-incisal range is limited from 0 to 10 millimeters without dietary restrictions.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for bilateral knee disorder, finding that there was no evidence linking his current knee problems to his military service.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to incomplete VA treatment records prior to December 30, 2016. The Appellant is seeking an earlier effective date for a 100 percent rating for dementia associated with brain trauma.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claim of service connection for a spine disability due to insufficient evidence regarding its onset in service.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for bilateral dry eye syndrome, finding that it was a usual effect of his in-service LASIK surgery and not a separate disease or injury.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for tremors in both hands, to include as due to herbicide exposure is remanded due to the need for a new medical opinion regarding the nature and etiology of his condition.

The Board has found that the AOJ did not substantially comply with prior remand directives and has therefore ordered further development for the issues of rating greater than 10 percent for right hip degenerative joint disease, TDIU, and functional loss due to pain.

The Board has remanded the claims for service connection for adenocarcinoma of the lungs with metastases to the brain and the Veteran's cause of death due to insufficient information regarding herbicide exposure during service.

The Board has determined that another remand is necessary to obtain informed consent records and quality assurance records related to the Veteran's May 2016 hospitalization and surgery, as these records may be crucial for determining if fault on VA's part was established in connection with the Veteran's myocardial infarction.

The Veteran's hypogammaglobulinemia condition is not currently service-connected, and a new VA examination is needed to determine the nature and etiology of this condition.