Other conditions Board decisions

The Board found that B.C. is not the Veteran's surviving spouse due to a separation by mutual consent but with an intent to desert, thus failing the continuous cohabitation requirement.

The Veteran's mandible and mouth disabilities are found to have started during service, thus granting service connection for these conditions.

The Board dismissed the appeal because the appellant died during the pendency of the overpayment claim, and thus has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the merits.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded for additional examinations and to address the issues of service connection for a sleep disorder, initial ratings for peripheral vascular disease of both lower extremities, and an effective date prior to October 20, 2011 for SMC at the housebound rate.

The Veteran's lung disorder and consequent need for lung removal surgery are found to be due to exposure to asbestos during his military service, granted retroactively as of June 30, 2010.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient medical opinion regarding the cause of the Veteran's hypertension and heart disability. The case needs a new addendum opinion from an examiner or VA cardiologist.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to inconsistencies in the Veteran's reports of his CVA symptoms and their impact on his ability to work. A new VA examination is needed to address these issues.

The Board has remanded the case for further development regarding the Veteran's lung condition, including whether it is related to his service and exposure to asbestos.

The Veteran's claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for varicose veins, thrombosis, and peripheral vascular disease of the bilateral lower extremities secondary to scrapping of veins was denied because the new evidence did not show carelessness or negligence in VA treatment.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for myalgia of the left lower extremity as secondary to his service-connected left ankle tenosynovitis from residuals of an ankle fracture, finding that there was no evidence supporting a link between the two conditions.

The Board has decided that the Veteran does not have a current diagnosis of PID and has denied service connection for PID. The issues of service connection for abdominal pain and a skin disorder, to include hives are remanded due to insufficient medical opinions.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to incomplete records and inadequate reasoning in the previous decision regarding compensation for fecal incontinence under 38 U.S.C. § 1151.

The Veteran's claim for a higher rating for his low back disability was denied, as the evidence did not show that it met the criteria for a rating in excess of 20 percent. The claim for TDIU was also denied due to lack of evidence showing he could not work due to service-connected disabilities.

The Board has remanded the case due to the complexity of the disability and the need for an advisory medical opinion regarding the nature and etiology of the Veteran’s claimed conditions in service, specifically whether the current disability existed prior to service, was it aggravated by service, and is the current disability related to service.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, specifically schizoaffective disorder, depressed type, has been granted. The Board also found that new and material evidence had been received to reopen the previously denied claim of service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder. However, the issue regarding a higher evaluation for perirectal abscess remains pending as there are no VA examination reports available.

The Veteran's initial increased disability ratings for keloids were granted, with specific ratings assigned based on the severity of his symptoms and the areas affected. The Veteran received a 30 percent rating for painful scars from December 30, 2009 to August 15, 2013, and another 30 percent rating from November 13, 2017. A separate 10 percent rating was granted for scars of the head, face or neck from August 15, 2013 to November 13, 2017.

The Veteran's appeal for a TDIU rating is dismissed because he failed to provide requested information needed to properly adjudicate the claim.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate development of evidence, specifically a lack of an adequate VA medical opinion. The Veteran's prostate condition claim is being returned for further development.

The Veteran requested withdrawal of his appeal regarding the addition of his former spouse, M.H., as a dependent. The Board dismissed the appeal due to the Veteran's request for withdrawal.

The Board has decided that the Veteran's chronic eye disabilities may have existed prior to service and were not clearly and unmistakably aggravated by service. The case is being remanded for further examination and opinion regarding these issues.