Other conditions Board decisions

The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient medical evidence on whether the Veteran's tonsil cancer is related to herbicide agent exposure, specifically Agent Orange. The RO should request an addendum medical opinion discussing the relationship of the tonsil cancer to the respiratory system and whether it was related to herbicide agent exposure.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's left eye pterygium is related to environmental exposure during service, and thus grants service connection for this condition.

The claim of service connection for segmental pulmonary fibrosis is granted, and the issue of SMC based on need for regular aid and attendance or being housebound is remanded.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims of service connection for nerve damage to both legs, finding no current disability and that any such condition is not related to his service-connected disabilities.

The Board has decided to remand the Veteran's claim for service connection for night sweats (claimed as hyperhidrosis) due to insufficient medical opinions and need for further development.

The appeal was dismissed due to the appellant's death, and no jurisdiction remains for further action.

The Veteran's service connection claim for a right knee disability (degenerative joint disease and total arthroplasty replacement) is remanded due to the need for an additional medical opinion regarding the etiology of his condition.

The Veteran's claim for service connection of a GI disorder was denied due to lack of current disability, and the new evidence submitted does not relate to an unestablished fact necessary to substantiate the claim.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate opinions regarding whether lipedema is related to service. The Veteran's claim for service connection for lipedema is now pending and will be reviewed again with new evidence.

The Veteran withdrew his appeal for withholding of VA benefits due to receipt of drill pay for fiscal year 2015, and the Board dismissed the case.

The Board found that the evidence does not support a finding of additional disability due to VA care, and thus denied compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151.

The Board denied an earlier effective date for service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death, finding that July 19, 2010 is not warranted due to the liberalizing change in regulations adding salivary gland cancer as a presumptive disease.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient medical opinions regarding whether the Veteran's visual disability is related to service, including herbicide agent exposure, or secondary to his service-connected diabetes mellitus.

The Veteran's appeal has been dismissed due to their death. The Board does not have jurisdiction to adjudicate the merits of this case.

The Board has remanded the case due to unclear VA medical opinions and a need for an addendum opinion. The issue of service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death is pending.

The Veteran's appeal for service connection for macular degeneration has been dismissed due to the withdrawal of the appeal by their authorized representative.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to procedural issues and confusion regarding the status of substitution for an earlier effective date claim. The Appellant needs clarification on what evidence is required to support his claim.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for residuals of a skull fracture has been granted. The issue of entitlement to TDIU prior to May 30, 2012 is dismissed as moot due to the Veteran's current total disability rating and receipt of SMC benefits.

The Board denied the appellant's appeal for an earlier effective date for SMC based on loss of use of the right lower extremity, finding that the most persuasive evidence did not show that the Veteran's service-connected disabilities resulted in loss of use of his right lower extremity prior to May 25, 1998.

The Veteran's attempt to make an irrevocable election for education benefits under the Post-9/11 GI Bill program in lieu of benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill program was not valid due to a lack of informed consent and subsequent rescission.