Other conditions Board decisions

The Veteran did not have any qualifying wartime service, thus denying the claim for death pension benefits.

The Board found that the overpayment of VA compensation benefits after removal of K.G. as a dependent spouse was properly created, and denied the Veteran's appeal.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for additional disability resulting from VA treatment for left foot nerve damage and right foot nerve damage, finding that there was no evidence of fault on the part of VA in providing the treatment.

The Board has determined that the overpayment in the amount of $2,412.25 for educational assistance benefits under the Transfer of Entitlement (TOE) provisions of 38 U.S.C. Chapter 33 (Post-9/11 GI Bill) was properly created and is valid. The appeal is remanded to address the issue of waiver of this overpayment.

The Board denied service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, finding that the Veteran's personality disorder did not meet the criteria for an acquired psychiatric disability under DSM-5. The Board also denied a TDIU rating as there was insufficient evidence to show the Veteran could not secure or follow substantially gainful employment due to his service-connected disabilities.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's current diagnosis of colon cancer is not related to exposure to herbicide agents during service, and therefore denied his claim for service connection.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to the Veteran's failure to attend scheduled VA examinations. The Veteran is requested to be examined by a psychiatrist who has not previously provided an opinion in this case.

The Board has remanded the case due to an inadequate VA opinion regarding service connection for larynx cancer, including squamous cell carcinoma of the neck. The Veteran's claim will be reviewed by a qualified examiner who must provide an updated opinion on whether it is at least as likely as not that the cancer is related to service, specifically herbicide exposure.

The Board denied the Veteran's attempt to reopen his claim for service connection of a dental condition, finding no new and material evidence.

The Board has remanded the claims for service connection for anemia and a disability rating for Raynaud's syndrome due to inadequate medical opinions in the previous decision. The Veteran must be provided with new examinations to address these issues.

The Board denied compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for residuals of right inguinal hernia repair due to VA treatment, finding that the disability was not caused or aggravated by carelessness, negligence, lack of proper skill, error in judgment, or similar instance of fault on the part of VA.

The Veteran withdrew his appeal, stating he is satisfied with the partial grant and does not wish to continue the appeal.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to issues related to the validity of a $6,491.80 debt and the need for an updated Financial Status Report.

The Veteran's sleep disturbance, diagnosed as insomnia disorder, is granted as secondary to his service-connected right shoulder injury.

The Veteran requested to withdraw the appeal for service connection of mild cognitive impairment, leading to its dismissal.

The Board has remanded the claims for service connection due to a lack of a VA examination and to determine if there is a relationship between the Veteran's hernia or residuals of a hernia or hernia repair and his military service.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient efforts in obtaining Social Security Administration records related to the Veteran's back disability.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient answers regarding systemic therapy for the rash. The Veteran's treatment with tolnaftate cream needs further clarification as to whether it affects the whole body and if similar to corticosteroids or immunosuppressive drugs.

The Veteran's loss of right testicle was not caused by VA's failure to exercise the expected degree of care, negligence, or lack of proper skill. The event (testicular ischemia) was reasonably foreseeable.

The Board has remanded the case due to a lack of standing, as the Appellant was not properly substituted in her father's appeal. The Court held that VA did not provide proper notice and opportunity for response.