Other conditions Board decisions

The Board denied the veteran's claim for an evaluation in excess of 10 percent for Duke B-2 adenocarcinoma of the rectum with status post left anterior resection with history of radiation, finding that his residuals were no more than moderately disabling.

The veteran's claims for increased evaluation of right fifth metacarpal and service connection for right hip arthritis were denied as there was no evidence to support the assertions.

The veteran's claim for an increased rating for a duodenal ulcer is denied due to the need for a VA examination and his failure without good cause to report for one scheduled in July 2002.

The veteran's application to reopen his claim of service connection for a subtotal gastrectomy was granted. The new evidence submitted by the veteran, including a statement from RGS, M.D., indicated that the gastrointestinal bleeding necessitating a subtotal gastrectomy was caused by a cortisone injection and high dose of aspirin taken during service.

The VA determined that the veteran did not develop additional disabilities as a result of carelessness, negligence, or error in judgment by VA during his treatment for a left internal carotid artery cavernous sinus fistula and bypass anastomosis.

The veteran's claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 due to additional disability from VA treatment in August 1993 was denied, as there is no medical evidence showing he currently has the conditions alleged. The claim for an initial evaluation of a left ulnar nerve injury also failed.

The veteran's sleep disorder, joint pain, and fatigue are presumed to be due to an undiagnosed illness incurred in service. The skin disorder is not shown to have been present in service or due to an undiagnosed illness.

The Board found that the appellant does not have current manifestations of reflux esophagitis or a cardiovascular disability, and thus denied service connection for both conditions.

The Board has determined that the veteran's service-connected residuals of a gunshot wound to the right hand warrant a disability evaluation in excess of 30 percent, but not more than 30 percent.

The Board of Veterans' Appeals has determined that the veteran's hiatal hernia began during his active service and granted service connection for this condition.

The veteran's postgastrectomy syndrome is rated at 40 percent, and his postoperative ventral hernia is rated at 20 percent.

The Board has granted service connection for traumatic arthritis of the left ankle and denied service connection for multiple joint disabilities. The veteran's claim for increased ratings for his left foot and ankle arthritis is also granted.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining medical records and employment medical records. The appeal will be reconsidered after these steps are completed.

The VA hospitalization in February 1983 did not result in the veteran's current urinary tract disorders, including carcinoma of the bladder.

The Board found that there is no objective evidence to support the veteran's claim for service connection for paresthesia of the legs due to an undiagnosed illness, and thus denied the claim.

The Board has remanded the case for further development and compliance with the Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000.

The veteran's appeal is about the evaluation of his service-connected dependent edema of both feet. The RO needs to schedule a Travel Board hearing and ensure that all notification and development action required by the Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000 (VCAA) are completed.

The Board denied the claim for service connection for the cause of the veteran's death, concluding that no service-connected disability caused or contributed to his death.

The Board found that the veteran's claim for non-receipt of a $3,552 pension check issued in 1983 was barred due to a six-year limitation period under the Barring Act.

The Board has determined that the appellant's deceased spouse did not have qualifying service as a member of the Philippine Commonwealth Army, including recognized guerrillas, in service of the United States Armed Forces. Therefore, the appellant does not meet the requirements for basic eligibility for VA death benefits.