Other conditions Board decisions

The veteran withdrew his appeal regarding the issue of service connection for bilateral defective hearing in February 1999, and the case is now dismissed without prejudice.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for a compensable rating for post-operative residuals of bilateral inguinal hernias and her claim for service connection for mitral valve prolapse with chest pain, finding that she did not file a timely appeal on either issue.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for enucleation of the right eye, finding that new and material evidence had not been submitted. The evidence considered included the veteran's personal statements and annotations on previously submitted documents.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for an increased rating and service connection, finding that his right middle finger fracture residuals did not warrant a compensable rating. The issues of service connection for impairment of the right hand other than the chip fracture were also denied.

The Board found that the veteran's death was not caused by his military service, but rather by a combination of factors including Hodgkin's disease and pneumonia. The claim for radiation exposure as an X-ray technician is plausible.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for service connection for a bilateral eye disability and for an increased rating for residuals of a fracture of the right fifth metacarpal.

The Board has granted service connection for post-traumatic osteoarthritis of the knees, and as a result, further development is needed to address the veteran's claims for special monthly compensation based on loss of use of both lower extremities and an earlier effective date for TDIU.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for a throat disorder and hair loss, finding that the evidence did not support these claims.

The VA determined that the appellant's service-connected limited motion of the temporomandibular articulation, status post surgery, warrants a rating of 30 percent, which is the maximum available under Diagnostic Code 9905. The appeal for an increased rating has been denied.

The Board found that the veteran's skin rash, fatigue, arthralgias, and indigestion are not due to undiagnosed illnesses. The claims for service connection were denied.

The VA awarded the appellant Dependency and Indemnity compensation benefits for the cause of the veteran's death on April 19, 1996. The effective date was set as that day.

The veteran's child is seeking retroactive payments of Dependents' Educational Assistance for courses completed from August 1987 to July 1995. However, the claim lacks legal merit and entitlement under the law as it was not filed before October 15, 1993, which is when the Giusti-Bravo settlement agreement became effective.

The veteran's claim for an increased rating of his service-connected residuals of a shell fragment wound with enucleation of the right eye was denied as there is no evidence reflecting that the vision in the left eye is worse than 20/40. The criteria for a disability rating higher than 40 percent are not met.

The Board has granted a 10% rating for the veteran's chronic urticaria, finding that it meets the criteria for this evaluation based on its productive itching and involvement of exposed surfaces such as the neck, forearm, and legs.

The Board has determined that the veteran's death was caused by cancer, and they need to obtain tissue samples for further analysis. The appeal is being remanded to the RO.

The veteran's claim for compensation under the provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 was denied because there was no evidence to support a finding that VA medical personnel were at fault or negligent in performing the Whipple procedure, which resulted in leakage and ulceration.

The Board found that there is no medical evidence linking the veteran's cancer of the larynx and lip to service or to nicotine dependence, thus denying his claim for service connection.

The veteran's service is not considered to have been active for purposes of VA improved death pension benefits. The appellant's claim for eligibility for VA improved death pension benefits is denied.

The Board denied the appellant's claim of eligibility for VA improved death pension benefits, finding no new and material evidence to reopen her case.

The Board has denied the appellant's claim for a compensable rating for residuals of a resection of the left ovary, as she is already receiving the highest schedular rating available.