Other conditions Board decisions

The case is being remanded for the appellant to provide income and medical expense reports for 2006, 2007, 2008, and 2009. The benefit sought on appeal remains denied.

The September 1969 rating decision granted service connection for cystitis, effective from the date of separation (May 1, 1969), based on a finding that the Veteran's in-service injury resulted in chronic cystitis.

The Board denied the appellant's claims for increased evaluations for left hip disability and service connection for a low back disability, finding that the evidence did not meet the criteria for higher ratings under applicable diagnostic codes.

The Veteran's initial disability rating for traumatic arthritis of the left hip was granted at a 30 percent level effective October 1, 2006. The VA found that his range of motion did not meet criteria for higher ratings based on limitation of flexion.

The Veteran died of urosepsis, which was caused by an occlusion of the superior mesenteric artery and a gangrenous small bowel. The cause of death is not service-connected.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded to obtain a VA medical examination and address the etiology of his right hip disorder, including whether it is secondary to service-connected left knee or lumbar spine disabilities.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's bilateral hammertoe bony deformities of the toes with associated calluses are attributable to service and grants service connection for these conditions.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's current right hand disability is not related to his service, and thus denied his claim for service connection.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for varicose veins, finding that there was no evidence linking the condition to his active duty service or any service-connected disability. The issue of an increased rating for a right ankle disability is being remanded for further examination.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for a prostate disability with impotence and polyps, both claimed to be related to herbicide exposure during his Vietnam service, are remanded due to the need for additional development including obtaining medical opinions.

The Board has remanded the case due to issues related to service connection for the cause of death and basic eligibility for accrued benefits, requiring additional development.

The appellant's mother was not entitled to death pension benefits due to her high net worth, which exceeded the reasonable amount that could be consumed for maintenance. As a result, accrued benefits are denied.

The Veteran's lymphomatoid granulomatosis is found to be related to his presumed exposure to herbicide agents, specifically Agent Orange, during service. The claim for service connection is granted.

The appellant's request for an extension of her delimiting date for use of Chapter 35 Dependents' Educational Assistance benefits beyond April 10, 2000 was denied as she had already reached the age of 31 and did not meet any exceptions to the eligibility criteria.

The Appellant has withdrawn her appeal regarding entitlement to the Veteran's benefits for the month of his death.

The Veteran's claim for payment of unauthorized medical expenses incurred at St. John's Hospital is denied as he does not meet the criteria for reimbursement under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1725 or 1728 and implementing regulations due to his coverage under a health-plan contract.

The Veteran's claims for service connection are being remanded due to missing private records and inextricably intertwined secondary claim. The RO is instructed to obtain all relevant records, including private hospital records from the Rice County Hospital Fairbault, and VA medical records.

The appellant is denied recognition as the Veteran's surviving spouse for VA benefits purposes.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development, including obtaining SSA records and scheduling a VA examination to determine the etiology of his claimed conditions.

The Board has remanded the case for further development due to insufficient information regarding the Veteran's and appellant's financial conditions, which is necessary to determine an appropriate apportionment of his disability compensation benefits.