Other conditions Board decisions

The Board has remanded the cases for further action due to incomplete follow-up of a requested VA heart examination.

The Veteran's appeal to reopen the claim for service connection for a skin rash disorder has been dismissed. The Board has also remanded cases involving bilateral feet issues, lung disability, and colon cancer with residual symptoms.

The Board has remanded the case for a medical examination to determine if the Veteran's dental issues are due to in-service trauma and bone loss, as well as whether he qualifies for compensation.

The Board has found that additional development is necessary and the case is being remanded for a VA examination to assess the current severity of the Veteran's TMJ disability, including during flare-ups.

The Veteran withdrew his appeal for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU). The Board dismissed the appeal as a result.

The Veteran withdrew his appeal for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disability prior to May 16, 2018.

The Veteran's right and left hip avascular necrosis have been granted initial ratings of 10 percent each, effective December 2, 2021.

The Veteran's medical expenses for emergency treatment at Gulf Breeze Hospital on May 18, 2015, and from May 22 to May 27, 2015, are approved as the nearest VA facility was not feasibly available.

The Veteran's recurrent cerebrovascular disability, including cerebrovascular accident residuals and transient ischemic attack, is being remanded for further examination to determine its relationship to service, particularly the in-service herbicide agent exposure.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's case for further development, including a new VA examination to evaluate his NHL residuals and determine if he is entitled to a TDIU due to his service-connected condition.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for respiratory and leg disabilities due to inadequate opinions in previous VA examinations. The Veteran is presumed sound at entrance into service as to any respiratory condition, and his preexisting conditions prior to military service are disregarded.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate development of evidence regarding the Veteran's aortic aneurysm, including whether it is related to service or any service-connected conditions.

The Board denied the appellant's request to reissue DEA benefits checks from March 2003 to June 2005, finding that the evidence persuasively weighs against his claim of not receiving or cashing the checks. The appellant and his mother argued that someone else fraudulently cashed the checks.

The Board denied service connection for a right foot condition (other than the right great toe fracture) as there was no evidence of its onset in service or causation to the Veteran's service-connected right great toe fracture.

The Board has remanded the case due to lack of substantial compliance with previous directives, specifically failing to schedule a VA examination for the Veteran's hiatal hernia.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for a low back disability is granted, with the condition being related to an in-service injury. The claim was reopened due to new and material evidence submitted since the previous denial.

The Board has found that another remand is necessary to obtain a VA examination and an adequate VA medical opinion regarding the Veteran's memory loss. The issues of service connection for memory loss and TDIU are inextricably intertwined, so the TDIU claim will be deferred until the development on the other claim is completed.

The Board has decided to remand the issue of whether the withholding of VA compensation benefits due to concurrent receipt of military drill pay in fiscal years (FY) 2008, 2009, and 2010 was proper. Further development is needed to verify the Veteran's drill dates and pay for these periods.

The Veteran's spouse and minor children are granted apportionment of his VA disability compensation benefits during his incarceration.

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