Other conditions Board decisions

The Veteran seeks service connection for a skin disorder allegedly due to in-service exposure to herbicides. The Board finds the claim requires further development, including obtaining medical records and scheduling an examination.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for carcinoma of the maxilla and PTSD with alcoholism were denied. The Board found that new and material evidence had not been received to reopen the claim for carcinoma of the maxilla, and that an effective date prior to December 8, 2004 for the grant of service connection for PTSD with alcoholism could not be assigned.

The Veteran's claim for an increased rating in excess of 30 percent for a left foot disorder is denied as the evidence does not support a higher evaluation.

The Board denied the appellant's claim as she did not cohabitate with the Veteran continuously from their attempted marriage until his death, and A.L.J., who filed a claim for gratuitous VA death benefits, was found to be entitled to these benefits.

The Veteran's traumatic amputation of the right little finger is rated at a 10 percent disability rating, which is the maximum allowed under VA regulations.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for colon polyps is denied as there is no competent evidence linking the current disability to his active duty.

The Board has determined that there is no current evidence of a bilateral eye disorder, and thus the Veteran's claim for service connection for bilateral corneal abrasion with uveitis cannot be granted.

The Board has determined that the veteran's Crohn's disease began during his active service and granted service connection for this condition.

The Veteran's malaria has not been shown to be active or have residuals, and thus he is not entitled to a compensable rating.

The Veteran's skin condition, diagnosed as lupus erythematosus, was incurred in service and is granted service connection.

The Veteran seeks service connection for a respiratory disorder, including as due to exposure to Agent Orange. The Board is requesting additional records and remanding the case for further development.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate justification for not obtaining a VA medical examination and nexus opinion, and because of other procedural issues.

The Veteran's varicose veins of the left lower extremity are found to have had its onset during service, and he is granted service connection. The Veteran's bilateral pes planus (claimed as foot pain) is assigned a compensable initial evaluation.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's bilateral foot onychomycosis is causally related to his active duty service and grants the claim for service connection.

The Veteran's unconsciousness due to alcohol intoxication, which was an emergent condition and not reasonable for prior VA authorization, qualifies for payment or reimbursement of medical expenses incurred at a private hospital.

The Veteran does not have a diagnosed left arm or left hand disorder, and the Board finds no evidence of such condition during service. The claim is denied.

The Veteran is seeking a higher initial evaluation for his service-connected fracture residuals of the left tibia and fibula. The appeal must be remanded to allow for new VA examinations to assess the current severity of his disability, including any neurological symptoms.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including consideration of a VA examination report and providing the Veteran with an opportunity to respond.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for leukemia, including CML and AML, to include as a result of herbicide exposure during his service in the Republic of Vietnam. The evidence did not show that the Veteran had been diagnosed with B cell leukemias or hairy cell leukemia, which are diseases associated with herbicide exposure.

The Veteran died in December 2004 and the appellant filed a claim for accrued benefits within one year of his death. However, there were no pending claims at the time of his death and he had not requested reimbursement for medical expenses prior to his death. Therefore, the appellant's claim is denied as a matter of law.