Other conditions Board decisions

The Veteran's claim for recognition of K. as his dependent spouse from September 2007 to October 2017 was denied because the claim was submitted after their divorce, and there is no clear evidence to rebut the presumption of regularity.

The Board dismissed the appeal for accrued benefits, including special monthly compensation (SMC) for the Veteran's need for aid and attendance and/or being housebound.

The Board has granted an earlier effective date of March 5, 2012 for the grant of service connection for chronic allergic conjunctivitis and a 10 percent disability rating for this condition as of September 16, 2019.

The Veteran's appeal is related to the denial of a Home Improvements and Structural Alterations (HISA) grant. The Board has not received any relevant documents from the AOJ, so it cannot make a decision based on the June 11, 2019, decision. The case is being remanded for the AOJ to obtain all pertinent records.

The Board has granted the Veteran's claim for service connection for left hip bursitis, finding that it is proximately due to his service-connected knee disabilities.

The Veteran's current psychosis was diagnosed within one year of separation from service and is presumed to be related to his military service.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for painful joints and a bilateral eye condition was reopened, but both claims were denied as the evidence did not show that these conditions began in or were caused by his active military service.

The Board has remanded the case due to conflicting information about the Veteran's employment history and earnings during a specific period, requiring further investigation by the AOJ.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate compliance with previous remand directives, specifically regarding an addendum opinion on the nature and etiology of the Veteran's urticaria.

The Board has remanded the case due to issues related to the validity of overpayment and retroactive apportionment of benefits for a period when the Veteran was incarcerated. The AOJ is required to address the request for retroactive adjudication of the apportionment request for the time period prior to the wife's death.

The Board has determined that the Appellant's character of service is Other than Honorable (OTH) due to conviction of a felony, which constitutes a regulatory bar to VA benefits. The appeal is denied.

The Veteran's overpayment of VA VRAP education benefits in the amount of $2,691.73 is being remanded for a statement of the case to address whether the debt was properly created.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for gastrointestinal disability and GERD are remanded due to inadequate medical opinions provided in the previous VA addendum reports.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate compliance with prior directives and insufficient evidence regarding the etiology of the Veteran's chest pain disorder. The claim will be reconsidered after additional development.

The Board has remanded the cases due to non-compliance with previous directives and inextricably intertwined issues. The TMJ disorder case requires an addendum medical opinion, while the TDIU case is also remanded.

The Veteran's claims for higher ratings and an earlier effective date for hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) are being remanded due to the need for additional VA examinations and consideration of outstanding treatment records.

The Board has granted service connection for bilateral blepharitis and dry eye syndrome, finding that these conditions manifested to a compensable degree prior to December 31, 2021, and the etiology of these disabilities is inconclusive.

The Board granted the Veteran's appeal, finding that he did not meet the statutory definition of a fugitive felon from January 12, 2016 to July 17, 2016 and thus withholding his disability compensation benefits was improper.

The Veteran's VA compensation benefits were terminated due to his status as a fugitive felon, but the decision is remanded to determine if he violated probation or parole conditions.

The Board has remanded the case due to errors in determining herbicide exposure and duty to assist, as well as an inadequate statement of reasons or bases for addressing secondary service connection.