Loading decisions…
Loading decisions…
16,189 vetted Board decisions in 2024.
The Veteran does not meet the basic eligibility criteria for PCAFC benefits as they do not have a service-connected disability rated at 70% or more.
The Board has granted service connection for urinary bladder urothelial carcinoma on a direct basis, effective from January 18, 2017.
The appeal for a non-service-connected burial allowance is dismissed as the benefit has already been granted in full.
The appeal regarding the timeliness of a VA Form 9 received in September 2019 is dismissed due to the Veteran's death.
The Veteran's claim for special monthly pension based on the need for aid and attendance was granted with an effective date of October 11, 2019. The decision is based on evidence showing that the Veteran required regular aid and attendance due to his diagnosis of Alzheimer's Disease.
The Board has decided to remand the case due to a duty to assist error, specifically not obtaining an examination regarding whether the Veteran's urinary tract disability is caused or aggravated by his service-connected conditions and not obtaining relevant private treatment records.
The Veteran's claim for a compensable rating for myelodysplastic syndrome (hyperbilirubinemia) with hemochromatosis of the liver is denied, and his claim for a 10 percent evaluation based on multiple noncompensable service-connected disabilities is also denied.
The Board found that the Veteran's income exceeded the maximum applicable pension rate for a veteran without dependents, leading to the termination of his nonservice-connected pension benefits effective January 1, 2014. The decision is denied as restoration of pension benefits is not warranted.
The appeal was dismissed because the appellant withdrew his appeal through his authorized representative.
The appeal was dismissed due to the appellant's death, and no jurisdiction remains for further action.
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for thoracic outlet syndrome as there was no probative evidence demonstrating a current disability during or approximate to the pendency of the claim.
The Board denied the Appellant's apportionment claim for the period when the Veteran was incarcerated, finding that her income exceeded her expenses and thus individual need on behalf of G.W. did not warrant an apportionment.
The Veteran is contesting the validity of an overpayment of VA dependent spouse benefits and whether it resulted from sole administrative error. The Board has decided to remand for further action, including a detailed audit explaining the creation of the debt and how the overpayment was calculated.
The appeal regarding medical reimbursement for non-VA services received by the Veteran on February 12, 2023, is dismissed as it was not adjudicated by the AOJ.
The Veteran's subdural hematoma, which caused memory impairment, is granted a 10 percent rating.
The Board has decided that the notification of the decision was legally inadequate and there is a pre-decisional duty to assist error. The case is remanded for an adequate medical decision regarding eligibility for PCAFC benefits.
The Board has decided to remand the Veteran's claim for service connection of Glucose 6 Phosphate Dehydrogenase (G6PD) due to a pre-decisional duty to assist error. The case will be returned to the AOJ for further development and consideration.
The Board denied service connection for residuals of a tailbone injury as there is no evidence of current disability related to an in-service tailbone injury.
The Board has remanded the case due to the need for a new medical opinion regarding whether VA providers failed to diagnose and treat any residual of the Veteran's tick bite, leading to an infection that manifested after he cleaned a pond. The opinion must address three elements: whether there was failure to diagnose and/or treat, whether proper diagnosis and treatment should have been rendered, and whether the disability would have been avoided with proper care.
The Board denied service connection for bicuspid aortic valve prolapse as it was found to be a congenital defect and not subject to a superimposed disease or injury during active service.
← Back to Other conditions overview
We are not the VA. Veterans’ Rights is an independent resource built for veterans. We are not the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, not part of the government, and not endorsed by any government agency.
This is general information, not legal advice. For advice about your own situation, talk to a VA-accredited representative — many help for free.