Other conditions Board decisions

The Board denied service connection for a bilateral foot condition, finding that the evidence did not support a link between current foot conditions and active duty service.

The claim for recognition as the surviving spouse is denied because she was legally married to another person at the time of her husband's death, and there are no exceptions that would allow her to be considered his surviving spouse.

The Veteran's initial rating for blindness, left eye with NLP and right eye vision loss due to stroke prior to February 19, 2014 was denied as his visual acuity in the right eye did not meet the criteria for a higher rating. The issue of entitlement to a TDIU is dismissed as moot since he has been receiving SMC benefits.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma due to herbicide agent exposure, finding that there was no evidence of herbicide exposure during his service in Panama and that the disease did not have its onset during or within one year after service.

The Board has remanded the case due to a lack of documentation regarding changes in direct deposit information for the Veteran's VA compensation benefits during his incarceration.

The Veteran's compensation was terminated due to being considered a fugitive felon during the specified period, and he has withdrawn his appeal.

The Board has decided that the Appellant's appeal for apportionment of the Veteran’s VA disability benefits on behalf of his minor child is not properly docketed and requires additional action.

The appellant, the Veteran's son, is not eligible for accrued benefits as he does not qualify as a child under VA regulations and has denied bearing any expenses related to his father's last sickness or burial.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for survivor’s pension benefits due to her excessive net worth, which exceeded the $127,061 limit effective December 1, 2018.

The Veteran's appeal regarding the reduction in his rating for left pudendal nerve entrapment and the termination of a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) is being remanded due to procedural errors and missing records.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to a failure to obtain an adequate medical opinion regarding whether the Veteran's right inguinal hernia status post repair is related to active service.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to an inadequate medical opinion regarding the etiology of the Veteran's facial cysts. The examiner needs to reconcile inconsistencies in the service medical records and provide a new opinion on whether the condition is related to active service.

The Veteran's appeals for increased ratings in excess of 10 percent for left hip strain with calcific tendonitis, and for limitations on flexion and extension have been dismissed as the Veteran requested to withdraw his appeal.

The Veteran's claim for an initial rating in excess of 20 percent for varicose veins of the lower left extremity is being remanded due to a duty-to-assist error. The VA examiner did not adequately consider all symptoms associated with his condition, including stasis pigmentation, eczema, or ulceration.

The Board denied an earlier effective date for DIC benefits because the appellant did not file a claim with SSA for survivor's/widow’s benefits, despite her application being for a one-time lump sum payment. The effective date is set at October 30, 2018.

The Board dismissed the appeal because the appellant withdrew it in writing before a decision was made.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for an addendum opinion regarding his service-connected disabilities and their impact on his ability to use his feet. The current examination did not address whether he would be equally well-served by amputation with a prosthetic.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for acute meningococcemia and its residuals, as well as bilateral cataracts claimed as due to in-service meningitis. The evidence did not support a current disability or chronic residual from the in-service illness.

The Board has remanded the case due to unclear opinions regarding a right front upper thigh injury and its relation to service.

The Veteran's appeal for retroactive CRDP compensation for the period from June 1, 2009 to August 31, 2010 is dismissed. The issue of an effective date prior to July 1, 2015 for retroactive CRDP compensation totalling $19,529.27 is remanded.