Other conditions decisions — 2023

The Board has remanded the case due to procedural issues and needs to issue a Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC) based on all available evidence.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for a dental disability for VA treatment purposes is denied as he does not meet the eligibility criteria under any of the specified classes.

The Board has remanded the cases for further examination and opinion regarding bowel incontinence associated with thoracolumbar spine disorder, as well as the issue of a TDIU prior to July 18, 2018.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to the Veteran's failure to appear for a VA examination and lack of updated treatment records. The Veteran needs an additional VA examination to determine if his service-connected disabilities result in the loss or loss of use of his foot/feet, which would affect his eligibility for financial assistance.

The Veteran's adult son is seeking recognition as the Veteran's child on the basis of permanent incapacity for self-support prior to attaining age 18. The Board has remanded the matter due to incomplete records and a need to obtain additional information regarding employment activity.

The Board has remanded the case due to a need for additional development, including obtaining VA and private treatment records, and providing an addendum opinion from a VA examiner.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence regarding the appellant's exposure to carcinogens at Fort McClellan, Alabama and her treatment records for breast cancer. The case will be retried with additional medical and personnel records obtained.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence regarding the Veteran's current eye disability status, specifically recurrent choroiditis with serous retinal detachment and scotoma. The Veteran was previously scheduled for a VA examination but refused it.

The Board has remanded the case due to outstanding private medical records and incorrect address notifications. The appellant is asked to provide any relevant medical records, and VA will attempt to obtain them.

The Board has granted service connection for basal cell carcinoma, finding that the condition is at least as likely as not related to sun exposure during military service in Vietnam.

The Board has remanded the case due to the need for a VA examination to assess the nature and extent of any residuals associated with the service-connected spinal meningitis.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's bilateral hand disabilities are not related to his period of active service and therefore denied service connection for these conditions.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence regarding whether the Veteran's chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is related to exposure during service. The Veteran needs a new opinion on this issue.

The Board dismissed the appeal as there was no adverse action for review, and the appellant's debt of $2,450.00 was repaid in full.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient medical opinions regarding whether the Veteran's severed artery during surgery was caused by carelessness, negligence, lack of proper skill, error in judgment or similar instance of fault on VA's part.

The Board has determined that the claim for service connection for a pulmonary disorder is remanded due to incomplete history, inadequate examination report, and failure to consider all relevant evidence including asbestos exposure. The Veteran's claim will be reconsidered with new opinions addressing his multiple occurrences of pneumonia during active duty.

The Board has found that the appellant can be recognized as the Veteran's surviving spouse for VA benefits purposes, given their continuous cohabitation and lack of knowledge of a legal impediment to common law marriage.

The Board has remanded the case due to errors in attributing the Veteran's diagnosed ophthalmoplegia migraine to his service-connected migraine headaches and relying on an inadequate VA examination. The Veteran is requested to provide updated treatment records and undergo a new examination to determine the nature and etiology of any bilateral eye disability.

The Veteran's appeal was dismissed due to their death, and the case is not eligible for substitution as no one else can take their place in the appeal.

The Board has determined that additional VA medical care caused the Veteran's right diaphragm paralysis, but is unsure if this was due to negligence or a foreseeable risk. The case is being sent back for further review by an anesthesiologist.