Other conditions Board decisions

The Veteran's emergency medical treatment for a heart attack and cardiac surgery at CMHS was authorized by VA, meeting the criteria for reimbursement of private medical expenses.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's claimed disabilities, including residuals of a cerebrovascular accident (CVA), diverticulitis, and right eye disability, were not incurred in or aggravated by his active duty service.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's respiratory disorder is not related to his service or asbestos exposure therein, and therefore denied the claim for service connection.

The Veteran's unauthorized medical expenses incurred on February 15, 2013 at the Eastern Niagara Hospital were not authorized by VA and an application was not made to VA within 72 hours after admission. The Board found that reimbursement under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1728 is not warranted due to the availability of a feasibly available VA medical facility.

The Veteran's claim for a waiver of recovery of an overpayment of VA nonservice-connected pension benefits in the amount of $3,397 was denied because recovery would not be against equity and good conscience.

The VA determined that the Veteran's need for a total abdominal hysterectomy was not caused by negligence or failure to diagnose, but rather due to her own non-compliance with medical management and treatment recommendations.

The Veteran's current respiratory disorder was not incurred in active duty and the current diagnoses of a respiratory disorder are not due to asbestos exposure during active duty.

The Board finds that there is no current diagnosis of residuals of a cold injury affecting the feet and hands, and the preponderance of the evidence does not support a finding that any such condition is related to service, including exposure to cold weather.

The Veteran's left thigh meralgia paresthetica is rated at a 10 percent disability rating prior to January 30, 2013. The appeal regarding a higher rating for the condition since that date has been withdrawn by the Veteran.

The Board finds that the appellant's deceased husband does not have qualifying service as a member of the Philippine Commonwealth Army, including recognized guerrillas, in the service of the United States Armed Forces. Therefore, he is not considered a veteran for purposes of VA benefits and the appellant cannot be considered his spouse for VA death benefits.

The Veteran's appeal was dismissed due to his death during the pendency of the appeal.

The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete service treatment records and requests for additional development, including obtaining medical records from Dr. Henry and First Baptist Hospital.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for a one-time payment from the FVEC Fund as he is not an eligible person or the surviving spouse of an eligible person.

The Veteran's claim for nonservice-connected pension benefits was granted effective July 16, 2007.

The Veteran's claim for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities is being remanded for additional development, including obtaining updated VA treatment records and any relevant non-VA healthcare provider records.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded for a more contemporaneous medical examination to assess the severity of his thoracic spine disability, including any neurological manifestations and muscle symptomatology. The examiner should also provide an opinion as to whether these symptoms are part and parcel of or in any way result from the service-connected T4 burst fracture with neuropathic pain.

The Board has determined that the appellant is recognized as the surviving spouse of the Veteran for the purpose of VA benefits.

The Board has found that new and material evidence has been received, allowing the claim to be reopened. The case is now REMANDED for further development including obtaining SSA records and providing VCAA notice.

The Board denied the appellant's claim as she did not meet the requirements to be recognized as the Veteran's surviving spouse for VA death benefits purposes.

The Board dismissed the appeal due to the death of the appellant, and thus has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the merits of this case.