Other conditions Board decisions

The Board has determined that additional development is needed to consider the Veteran's arguments and evidence related to his hobby of breeding horses, as well as any incomplete Substantive Appeal form. The case will be remanded for these purposes.

The Board has remanded the case for further development to verify the Veteran's service in Vietnam and to determine if atherosclerosis of the aorta, one of the causes of death, is related to service. The appellant must provide any necessary information to assist with these requests.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development, including obtaining a medical opinion and readjudicating his service connection claim. Additionally, the earlier effective date issue will be returned to the RO after issuance of a Statement of the Case.

The Board has granted the Veteran's claim, finding that his nonservice-connected neurological disability of the right upper extremity is aggravated by his service-connected left median neuropathy.

The Board has determined that the appellant does not have qualifying service as a Veteran for VA purposes during the period when he claims he sustained injuries resulting in the claimed disabilities. Therefore, his claims for service connection are denied.

The Board has decided to remand the case for additional development, including obtaining VA treatment records and scheduling a VA examination.

The RO denied a rating in excess of 10 percent for the Veteran's service-connected bilateral spondylosis at L5-S1 vertebrae.

The Board has determined that the overpayment of VA educational assistance benefits in the amount of $21,644.47 was properly calculated and denied.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's low back disability did not have its onset in service and is not shown by the competent and probative evidence to be the result of disease or injury incurred during his military service.

The Board denied service connection for bilateral foot disabilities and TMJ syndrome, finding that the conditions were not incurred or aggravated by military service.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for a video hearing before a Veterans Law Judge.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's chronic brain syndrome, which pre-existed service and was not aggravated by service, does not meet the criteria for service connection.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's left foot peroneal brevis insertional tendonitis is related to her in-service left ankle sprain, and thus service connection for this condition is granted.

The Veteran's carcinoma of the right tonsil was not incurred or aggravated by his active duty service, including exposure to herbicides. The claim is denied.

The Veteran's left cubital tunnel release and ulnar nerve subcutaneous transposition have been rated at 30 percent, effective as of the date of the decision.

The VA determined that the appellant could not be recognized as the surviving spouse of the Veteran for purposes of receiving VA benefits due to their marriage lasting less than a year prior to his death, and no children were born during this period. The appellant requested consideration of a common law marriage.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's left lower extremity disability, characterized by numbness and weakness, qualifies as a chronic disability under 38 C.F.R. § 3.317 due to his service in the Persian Gulf War. As such, service connection is granted.

The Board found that the overpayment of $3,572 was properly created due to the Veteran's failure to timely notify VA of his divorce and remarriage.

The Board has reopened the Veteran's claims for service connection for a pilonidal cyst and normocytic anemia, finding new and material evidence. The Veteran's hepatitis B is rated at 40%.

The Board has ordered a remand to obtain medical records from the Veteran's hospitalization and to seek an addendum opinion regarding the cause of death. The appellant contends that service-connected conditions contributed to or caused the Veteran's death, but the VA examiner in April 2011 did not address these issues.