Other conditions Board decisions

The Veteran's spouse, R.P., was recognized as his surviving spouse for purposes of DIC, death pension, and accrued benefits due to her marriage to the Veteran prior to his death. The separation from the Veteran did not meet the criteria for a fault-based termination of the marriage.

The Board has dismissed the appeals as the underlying non-VA care was approved for payment by VA and reimbursement made.

The Board has granted service connection for the Veteran's TMJ disorder, finding that it is either directly related to active duty service or secondary to his service-connected PTSD with unspecified depressive disorder and bruxism.

The Veteran's hallux valgus of the right and left feet were granted initial 10 percent ratings, effective March 17, 2022.

The Veteran and the appellant were divorced during the appeal period, making it impossible to grant an apportionment of the Veteran's VA disability compensation for the benefit of the appellant.

The appeal for eligibility for benefits under VA's Program of Comprehensive Assistance for Family Caregivers (PCAFC) is dismissed due to the Veteran's death.

The Board denied the appellant's request to substitute as a beneficiary for her deceased mother's pending DIC and accrued benefits claim, stating that she did not meet eligibility criteria due to lack of evidence showing she bore the expense of last sickness or burial.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded due to an inadequate VA examination, and a new one must be conducted.

The appeal regarding the effective date for service connection for muscle injuries and leg length shortening is dismissed. The February 1971 rating decision is revised to assign separate disability ratings for severe muscle damage to muscle groups XIV, XV, and XIII, as well as a 30 percent rating for severe muscle damage to muscle group XV.

The Board has remanded the case due to the need for additional medical opinions regarding whether the Veteran's seroma disability was a foreseeable consequence of the March 2013 panniculectomy surgery and aftercare, and if so, whether VA's standard of care was appropriate. The AOJ must also obtain all relevant treatment records.

The Board has received a withdrawal request from the appellant's representative, and thus the appeal is dismissed.

The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete service treatment records and the need for a VA medical opinion regarding the etiology of the left foot bunion.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for further development and consideration, including obtaining medical opinions from an oncologist or similar specialist to address the etiology of his skin conditions and loss of testicles. The claims are related to herbicide exposure and in-service toxic exposure risk activities (TERA).

The Board has granted service connection for right and left hip arthritis as these conditions manifested within one year of the Veteran's separation from active duty.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection and rating of his cervical spine disability, finding no clear and unmistakable error in previous decisions.

The Veteran's appeal for effective dates prior to February 13, 2013, for TDIU and Dependents' Educational Assistance has been withdrawn by the Veteran through his authorized representative.

The Board has decided that the Veteran's claims for service connection for a sleep disorder and atrial fibrillation are not granted. The case is being remanded to obtain additional medical records.

The Board dismissed the appeal because the appellant requested to withdraw it before a decision was made.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for a left eye disability and mandible/TMJ syndrome, finding that there was no current disability other than refractive error for the left eye and insufficient evidence of a current mandible/TMJ disability.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for service connection for thickened bladder walls and prostate hypertrophy due to insufficient medical opinions addressing whether these conditions are related to his Gulf War service. The VA is instructed to obtain a new opinion that addresses both the pathophysiology and etiology of the conditions in the context of the Veteran's unique circumstances.