Other conditions Board decisions

The Board has granted the Veteran's claim for service connection for impotence as secondary to his service-connected prostatitis, with a rating of 30% effective from the date of the decision.

The Board has granted the Veteran's claim for service connection for a right leg disability, including atrophy and reflex sympathetic dystrophy of the right leg, as secondary to her service-connected right ankle fusion.

The Veteran's claim for a left lower extremity disability was denied as there is no evidence of current disability. The Board notes that numbness alone without a diagnosed or identifiable underlying malady does not constitute a disability.

The Board finds that the Veteran's myotonic dystrophy is likely due to his presumed exposure to Agent Orange during service, and grants service connection for this condition.

The Board found no current evidence of a disability of the right lower extremity characterized by numbness/paresthesia or a disability characterized by syncopal episodes, thus denying both claims.

The Veteran has a history of recurrent genital warts since service, and the evidence supports this as a direct result of his military service.

The Board found that the Veteran's benign vascular neoplasm was not incurred or aggravated by service, including exposure to herbicides. The decision is vacated due to a failure to consider the relaxed evidentiary standard for combat veterans.

The Board denied the Veteran's request for a waiver of recovery of an overpayment of $40,776.70 because his request was not filed within the required 180-day period after notification of the overpayment.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for an earlier effective date of May 4, 2006 for the reinstatement of her death pension benefits. The decision stated that the earliest effective date was May 4, 2006 as this is when the claim was received by VA.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for myeloma was remanded due to the need to obtain missing records and VA treatment records, as well as a VA examination. The case will be re-adjudicated after these actions.

The Veteran's unauthorized medical expenses incurred at Northside Hospital from August 30, 2006 to September 1, 2006 are now eligible for payment or reimbursement due to the presence of a serious threat to life or health that rendered immediate emergency care necessary.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's neck cancer was caused by carelessness, negligence or error in judgment on the part of VA during a lip biopsy procedure. As such, compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 is granted.

The Board has determined that the Appellant is entitled to recognition as the surviving spouse of the Veteran for purposes of receiving VA death benefits, based on her continuous cohabitation with the Veteran prior to their legal marriage and her role as his primary caregiver.

The Board has denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for a dental disorder for compensation purposes due to lack of evidence showing loss of substance of body of maxilla or mandible, which is required for such claims.

The Veteran's cognitive disorder, claimed as residuals of TBI, is found to be incurred during active service.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development to determine the current nature and extent of her service-connected left knee disability, including which specific symptoms are attributable to the service-connected condition.

The Board finds that the Veteran's claim for service connection for loss of teeth is denied as there is no evidence of in-service trauma or osteomyelitis resulting in tooth loss, and replaceable missing teeth are not considered disabling for VA disability compensation purposes.

The Veteran's claim for a higher initial rating for his service-connected schizoaffective disorder has been remanded. The Board finds that the Veteran is now entitled to a total rating based on individual unemployability due to his service-connected psychiatric disability.

The Veteran's unauthorized medical expenses incurred at a non-VA hospital on April 28, 2009 are denied as the treatment was not rendered in an emergency situation and VA facilities were feasibly available.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including obtaining additional VA and private treatment records, scheduling a new VA examination, and considering all evidence of record.