Other conditions Board decisions
239,517 indexed Board decisions for Other conditions.
Badges describe the whole decision, not the outcome for every condition listed. An appeal can grant one issue and deny or remand another. Check the original decision for each issue; these outcomes do not predict your claim.
- Whole decision: DeniedFebruary 2010
The Veteran's service in the Philippine Commonwealth Army and Regular Philippine Army is not considered qualifying service for VA pension benefits purposes. The appellant's application for accrued benefits was received more than 25 years after the Veteran's death, which exceeds the one-year filing requirement. Therefore, both claims are denied.
- Whole decision: GrantedFebruary 2010
The Board affirmed the reduction in the rating for residuals of adenocarcinoma of the prostate from 100 percent to 40 percent, effective October 1, 2004.
- Whole decision: DeniedFebruary 2010
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for glioblastoma, finding that it was not caused by his in-service exposure to ionizing radiation and concluding that there was no reasonable possibility that the glioblastoma resulted from such exposure. The only service-connected disability at the time of death was residuals of pilonidal cyst.
- Whole decision: DeniedFebruary 2010
The Board has determined that the appellant is not the surviving spouse of the Veteran, and therefore does not meet the requirements for DIC benefits.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)February 2010
The Board has remanded the claims for a VA opinion to determine if the Veteran's malignant astrocytoma is related to service, including his Persian Gulf War service. The appellant and the Veteran contended that he experienced headaches during service which may have been symptoms of the tumor.
- Whole decision: DeniedFebruary 2010
The Board determined that the Veteran's preexisting right foot condition was not aggravated by military service and denied his claim for service connection.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)February 2010
The Veteran's claim for compensation benefits under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 is being remanded due to the VA's failure to locate a specific physician who treated him in 1998, and to obtain his opinion regarding whether the infections were caused or aggravated by VA treatment.
- Whole decision: GrantedFebruary 2010
The Veteran's cold injuries of the hands and ear lobes, diagnosed as cold sensitization of the hands and earlobes, were incurred in active military service. The Board finds that the Veteran currently has cold injuries of the feet, which are related to his military service.
- Whole decision: DeniedFebruary 2010
The Veteran's unauthorized medical expenses for emergency care at a private facility were denied as the condition was not an emergency and VA facilities were feasibly available.
- Whole decision: DeniedFebruary 2010
The Veteran's left sternoclavicular strain is currently rated at 10 percent, but the Board finds that he does not meet the criteria for a higher rating based on limitation of motion or pain.
- Whole decision: DeniedFebruary 2010
The Veteran's claim for a higher rating for tremors of the head and neck, since May 3, 2004, was denied as his disability is currently rated at 10 percent.
- Whole decision: DeniedFebruary 2010
The Board found no medical evidence linking the Veteran's current bilateral elbow disability to his military service, and denied the claim.
- Whole decision: GrantedFebruary 2010
The Veteran's service-connected residuals of a shell fragment wound to the right foot are currently evaluated as 10 percent disabling, which is consistent with the criteria for a moderate disability under Diagnostic Code 5311.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)February 2010
The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including a medical examination to determine if the Veteran's service-connected left hand injury aggravates his claimed abdominal muscle strain or tear. The TDIU claim is also inextricably intertwined with the service connection claim and must be deferred until the outcome of the other claim.
- Whole decision: DeniedFebruary 2010
The Board denied the appellant's claim for an earlier effective date, finding that the evidence did not show a factual ascertainable increase in disability within one year prior to his December 27, 2002, correspondence. The effective date of the increased rating remains at December 27, 2002.
- Whole decision: DeniedFebruary 2010
The Veteran's claim for an increased rating for his back disability was denied as the evidence did not show residuals of fracture of the vertebra or unfavorable ankylosis of any segment of the spine, which would warrant a higher rating.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)February 2010
The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining employment records from McKesson Drug and medical examination to determine if service-connected bilateral pes planus aggravates the Veteran's back and neck disabilities.
- Whole decision: DeniedFebruary 2010
The Veteran's claim for a higher rating for splenomegaly was denied as the condition does not meet the criteria for a higher rating under any applicable diagnostic codes.
- Whole decision: DeniedFebruary 2010
The Veteran's service connection claims for residuals of a contusion of the left forearm, chest injury, breathing disorder (pulmonary), and sleep disorder have all been denied. The Board found no evidence of current disabilities related to these conditions.,Post-service medical records do not show any diagnosis of a left forearm or chest disability. Regarding the Veteran's breathing condition, he was diagnosed with dyspnea but did not meet criteria for a pulmonary disability based on his PFTs and CT scan results. The sleep disorder claim was denied as well.
- Whole decision: GrantedFebruary 2010
The Veteran's unauthorized medical expenses incurred from January 25, 2007 to February 23, 2007 at Parish Medical Center were granted payment by VA.
← Back to Other conditions overview
We are not the VA. Veterans’ Rights is an independent resource built for veterans. We are not the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, not part of the government, and not endorsed by any government agency.
This is general information, not legal advice. For advice about your own situation, talk to a VA-accredited representative — many help for free.