Other conditions Board decisions

The Veteran seeks service connection for gouty arthritis of his feet, which he claims was misdiagnosed as tinea pedis during service. The Board has determined that further development is needed to clarify the etiology and relationship between the Veteran's current condition and his service-connected impetigo.

The Board found that the Veteran does not have chronic vulvovaginitis and denied her claim for service connection.

The Board has remanded the case for further development and consideration of the Veteran's claim for service connection for a mood disorder.

The Board has granted the Veteran's petition to reopen his claim for service connection for a bilateral foot disorder. The underlying issue of service connection on the merits is being remanded for further development.

The Board found that the widow's disabilities did not confine her to her home or area of assisted living facility, and she was not permanently bedridden. Therefore, the appellant is not entitled to accrued benefits based on the need for regular aid and attendance or at the housebound rate.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been received to reopen the claim for service connection for familial olivopontocerebellar atrophy. The Veteran's disability is found to have first manifested in service, thus establishing a link between her current condition and active duty.

The Veteran's appeal for medical expense reimbursement has been dismissed due to his death.

The Veteran died of hypertensive cardiovascular disease and was not receiving VA compensation or pension benefits at the time of his death. The Board denied the claim for nonservice-connected burial benefits as the criteria were not met.

The Board denied the appellant's claim as she was not the Veteran's surviving spouse for VA death benefits.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence regarding whether the Veteran's spondylolysis preexisted service and was not aggravated by service, or if any current back disability is related to service.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased ratings and service connection, finding that his conditions did not warrant higher evaluations or service connection.

The Board denied the reopening of the claim for service connection for refractive error and presbyopia, finding that new and material evidence had not been received.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence sufficient to reopen the Veteran's gastrointestinal disorder claim has been received, but further development is needed before the claim may be adjudicated on its merits.

The Board has determined that the Veteran does not have a dental condition or disability, to include periodontal disease or extracted teeth, as a result of combat wounds or other trauma incurred during his active military service. Therefore, service connection for a dental condition for treatment purposes is denied.

The Veteran's unauthorized medical expenses incurred at a non-VA facility were denied as he had workers' compensation coverage for the care.

The Board found that the Veteran's residuals from a fracture of the left mandible do not meet the criteria for a compensable evaluation, as there was no significant loss of motion or masticatory function. The noncompensable rating assigned is appropriate given the current findings.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's actions, including failure to report his wife's income and endorsement of stolen checks, constituted bad faith. Therefore, recovery of the overpayment is not allowed.

The Veteran's service-connected foot disabilities have been granted initial disability ratings of 20 percent each for residuals, status post cheilectomy of the left and right metatarsophalangeal joints (MTPJs) with postoperative hallux rigidus.

The Veteran's unauthorized medical expenses for nosebleeds at the Wichita Clinic were denied as he had private insurance coverage.

The Board found that the Veteran's biopsy scar did not meet the criteria for a compensable rating under any applicable portion of the VA rating schedule, and thus denied her claim for an increased rating.