Other conditions Board decisions

The veteran's claim for nonservice-connected disability pension benefits is being remanded due to the need to obtain medical records related to his motor vehicle accident and a VA physical examination.

The Board found that there was no clear and unmistakable evidence to show the stress fractures preexisted service. However, since the presumption of soundness has not been rebutted, the claim for service connection for residual disability from stress fracture of the left femur and right tibia was denied as there is no current disability.

The Board dismissed the motion alleging clear and unmistakable error (CUE) in a March 1985 decision that terminated the veteran's total rating due to unemployability caused by service-connected disabilities. The moving party did not have legal standing to pursue this motion.

The veteran is seeking a higher disability evaluation for her service-connected muscular myalgia, which was initially assigned a 20 percent rating. The VA has ordered additional medical examination and development to determine the severity of her condition.

The Board found that the appellant did not timely perfect an appeal to the RO decision denying her waiver of overpayment of pension benefits, and thus denied the appeal.

The veteran's son is not eligible for Dependents' Educational Assistance under Chapter 35 due to the age limit and other eligibility criteria.

The Board found that the reduction of the veteran's disability rating from 40 percent to 30 percent for hiatal hernia with status post antral gastritis with Helicobacter pylori and colon perforation was not warranted due to lack of improvement in his condition.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for a compensable rating for residuals of a laceration, palm of the right hand with skin graft and a separate compensable evaluation of 10 percent for multiple service-connected disabilities evaluated as noncompensable pursuant to the criteria of 38 C.F.R. � 3.324.

The Board has remanded the case due to changes in the law and the need for additional development, including obtaining medical records and scheduling a VA examination.

The Board has determined that the veteran's claim for service connection for a heart condition, specifically hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, should be remanded due to incomplete medical records and the need for further examination.

The veteran's spouse was not entitled to accrued benefits for the additional compensation not paid to the veteran from October 1, 1978 to July 1, 1998 due to lack of proof of marriage.

The Board denied reopening the claim for service connection due to lack of new and material evidence, including medical opinions not linking thrombophlebitis of the left leg to military service.

The VA determined that the appellant's father did not have recognized service in the Armed Forces of the United States or as a member of the Philippine Commonwealth Army, including the recognized guerrillas, in the service of the U.S. Armed Forces and therefore denied the claim for basic eligibility for VA benefits.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for basic eligibility for VA benefits due to her deceased husband not having qualifying military service with the United States Armed Forces.

The veteran's claim for service connection for a personality disorder with panic attacks is denied as the condition is not considered a disease or injury eligible for VA compensation benefits.

The VA denied an increased (compensable) evaluation for left ear defective hearing, as the veteran's current level of disability does not meet the criteria for a higher rating.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for nonservice-connected pension benefits due to insufficient qualifying wartime service in the Merchant Marines.

The Board has remanded the case due to a lack of evidence in the IVM folder, and the appellant is required to verify her income for each year involved in the overpayment.

The veteran's claim for a higher evaluation and earlier effective date for total disability rating based on individual unemployability was denied due to the lack of evidence showing symptoms that warranted an increased rating or an earlier effective date.

The Board dismissed the matter due to lack of jurisdiction, as addressed by the Court in Scates v. Gober.