Other conditions Board decisions

The Veteran's appeal was dismissed due to their death, and no jurisdiction remains for the Board to consider the merits of the case.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient information regarding the appellant's discharge and its impact on VA benefits. The Board will attempt to obtain additional service records, including those related to his court-martial proceedings, Article 15 for failing to pay alimony, and administrative separation.

The Board has already decided the matter of an earlier effective date for service connection, and it is dismissed as there are no further issues to address.

The Veteran's shrapnel wound left hand with retained foreign bodies is rated at 20 percent, which represents moderate incomplete paralysis of the median nerve. The Board found that the evidence does not support a higher rating.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient medical examination and incomplete service treatment records. The Veteran's claim for residuals of a fractured jaw is being reviewed again.

The Board has remanded the case due to procedural issues related to accrued benefits, specifically regarding the appellant's eligibility as a substitute for the Veteran and her ability to reduce the Veteran's countable income for pension purposes.

The appellant is not eligible for substitution as a claimant for the Veteran's pending claim or for accrued benefits, and thus his claims are denied.

The Board has remanded the case due to a need for further clarification regarding the date of onset of the Veteran's peripheral artery disease, right and left legs.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate opinions on whether the inguinal hernia is related to service or if it was aggravated by a pre-existing duodenal ulcer disease.

The Board has determined that the current decision is not sufficient and requires additional medical opinions to properly address when the Veteran's Huntington's disease first manifested, whether it was incurred in service, and if so, whether it was aggravated by service.

The Board denied service connection for right and left leg shin splints, finding no current diagnosis of the conditions.,The Board also denied initial ratings higher than 10 percent for service-connected right and left thumb strains.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's October 2017 VA Form 21-527EZ was substantially complete and should be accepted by VA. The appeal is granted to this extent only, with a remand for further development and adjudication of the claim under applicable regulations.

The Board has decided to remand the claims for service connection for right foot, left foot, right hand, and left hand disorders due to insufficient evidence. A new medical examination is required.

The Veteran's service-connected vitiligo has spread to cover more than 40 percent of his entire body and requires constant or near-constant systemic therapy with immunosuppressive drugs. The Board denied the claim for a rating greater than 10 percent for vitiligo as the current rating is the highest available under the specific diagnostic code.

The Veteran's overpayment of VA compensation benefits is waived in full, as the creation of the debt was primarily due to VA's failure to honor her request to stop receiving benefits upon returning to active duty.

The Board has remanded the case due to a lack of documentation regarding a potential transfer from Memorial Hermann Hospital (MHH) to a VA facility. The appellant needs to provide any relevant, outstanding documentation.

The Veteran's biological daughter, A.D., became permanently incapable of self-support due to her childhood leukemia and the side effects from the leukemia treatment including psychological impacts prior to attaining the age of 18. The Board granted the claim for additional dependency compensation.

The Board has remanded the claims for bilateral hallux valgus, service connection for a bilateral foot disability including metatarsus varus, and TDIU due to issues with the current evidence of record and need for additional examinations.

The Board denied the Veteran's challenges to the overpayment and waiver of recoupment, finding that his claim for a waiver was untimely due to expiration of the limitations period.

The Board has remanded the case due to ambiguity regarding whether the Veteran had a diagnosis of iron deficiency anemia during the period on appeal. Further development is needed, including a new VA examination and opinion.