Other conditions Board decisions

The Board found that the Veteran's current bilateral foot disorder is not related to his service, including any symptomatology shown during service.

The Board denied service connection for a bilateral foot disorder, granted an initial 10 percent evaluation for the status post right tibial and fibular fracture with ORIF from June 20, 2003 to June 11, 2004, and from November 20, 2004, and granted a 100 percent evaluation for the same condition from June 12, 2004 to November 19, 2004. The Board also granted an initial 10 percent evaluation for the status post left tibial stress fracture from June 20, 2003 to February 16, 2007 and denied a compensable evaluation thereafter.

The appellant has no legal entitlement to accrued benefits.

The case is remanded to determine if the Veteran was entitled to a TDIU on an extra-schedular basis prior to April 25, 2005.

The Board found that the Veteran's left leg cellulitis and loss of teeth were not incurred in or aggravated by his active service, and are unrelated to any incident therein.

The Veteran withdrew his appeal, and the Board has no jurisdiction to review it.

The Board granted the appellant's claims for Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) benefits under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 and eligibility for Dependents' Educational Assistance (DEA) pursuant to Chapter 35, Title 38, United States Code.

The Veteran's claim for reimbursement of unauthorized prescription medications was denied because the medical treatment was not for a service-connected disability and did not meet the criteria for an emergency.

The appellant is not eligible for VA benefits due to a lack of verified active military service with the United States Armed Forces.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for ulcerative colitis with colostomy, as there was no evidence of a chronic condition in service or during an applicable presumption period and still has such condition.

The Veteran's current wife, [redacted], should be recognized as his dependent for VA purposes.

The Board remands the claim for service connection for dysthymia with a panic disorder to obtain additional evidence and ensure all required development is conducted.

The Veteran was eligible for burial in a national cemetery but not buried there, and the Appellant incurred the expenses of the Veteran's burial plot and internment. Therefore, the criteria for entitlement to a nonservice connected plot or interment allowance have been met.

The Board found that the overpayment was solely due to VA administrative error and not properly created, thus dismissing the debt.

The appellant was not recognized as the Veteran's surviving spouse for purposes of obtaining VA benefits due to a lack of continuous cohabitation from the date of their marriage until his death.

The Board denied the Veteran's attempt to reopen a claim for VA old age pension, as new evidence did not show service that could confer eligibility.

The Veteran did not file a timely Notice of Disagreement regarding the reduction of his disability compensation benefits from 100 percent to 10 percent due to incarceration for a felony, and he has failed to raise a valid claim of clear and unmistakable error in that decision.

The Veteran's appeal for reimbursement of a $263 professional license application fee was denied because VA education assistance does not cover the cost of applying for a professional license.

The appeal was denied because the Veteran's remains were not buried in a cemetery, and no plot was purchased or obtained.

The appeal was partially granted, as the appellant is entitled to a plot or interment allowance but not to a burial benefit or death pension benefits.