Scars decisions — 2007
696 indexed Board decisions in 2007.
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: Remanded (sent back)September 2007
The veteran's claims for increased ratings are remanded due to the need for additional VA examinations.
- Whole decision: DeniedSeptember 2007
The Board denied the veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for service connection of scars resulting from multiple dog bites, finding that May 7, 2003 was the earliest date entitlement arose.
- Whole decision: DeniedSeptember 2007
The Board has determined that the veteran's claims for increased rating for hearing loss and service connection for a scar on the left cheek, as well as chloracne, have been denied. The denial is based on lack of evidence linking the conditions to active military service or Agent Orange exposure.
- Whole decision: DismissedSeptember 2007
The veteran's appeal has been withdrawn, and the case is dismissed.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)September 2007
The veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development, including obtaining medical records and scheduling examinations to assess the severity of his service-connected disabilities.
- Whole decision: DeniedSeptember 2007
The Board denied service connection for the veteran's claimed left arm and chest conditions, finding that there was no evidence of a chronic condition during service or a relationship to service.
- Whole decision: GrantedSeptember 2007
The veteran's claims for increased ratings and service connection were granted, but the effective dates are not specified. The veteran is still seeking higher evaluations for her hyperpigmented lesions.
- Whole decision: Partly grantedSeptember 2007
The veteran's cervical and lumbar strain were incurred during service, while her foot fungus was not shown to be related to service. Other claims of service connection are denied.
- Whole decision: DeniedSeptember 2007
The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased initial evaluations for temporomandibular disorder and trismus, as well as a scar of the right cheek in the preauricular area.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)September 2007
The veteran's claim for a higher rating for his service-connected residual scars of the face with paresthesia is being remanded due to insufficient findings related to his scars under applicable rating criteria. The RO must arrange for dermatological and neurological examinations to obtain findings responsive to these criteria.
- Whole decision: DeniedSeptember 2007
The veteran's claim for service connection for burn scars of the back was denied as there is no medical evidence linking her current condition to a burn injury sustained during active duty.,For residuals of a left ankle sprain, the veteran did not meet the criteria for a compensable rating prior to June 28, 1999. A 10% rating was granted effective from that date.
- Whole decision: GrantedSeptember 2007
The veteran's right groin scar with right femoral nerve entrapment syndrome was the result of a complication from his April 1999 cardiac catheterization, which was not reasonably foreseeable. The Board finds that compensation under the provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 is warranted.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)September 2007
The veteran's claim for special monthly compensation (SMC) for aid and attendance and/or housebound status is being remanded due to the need for additional VA treatment records, a new VA examination, and further development of his case.
- Whole decision: DeniedSeptember 2007
The Board denied the veteran's increased rating claim for postoperative residuals involving an injury to the left sixth rib with associated adhesive pleurisy and his TDIU claim due to service-connected disabilities. The evidence did not support a higher rating based on pulmonary function test findings, and the preponderance of the medical evidence indicated that the veteran was unemployable due to age and other factors unrelated to his service-connected conditions.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)September 2007
The veteran's claim for special monthly compensation based on a need for aid and attendance is being remanded due to the need for further development, including a VA examination.
- Whole decision: GrantedSeptember 2007
The veteran's claim for service connection for subcutaneous scar tissue or inclusion cyst on the ventral aspect of the penis, claimed as residuals of a circumcision is granted. The veteran also has an extraschedular evaluation in excess of 30 percent for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS).
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)September 2007
The veteran's appeal is remanded due to the need for a VA examination by an appropriate specialist and consideration of additional evidence submitted since the April 2007 supplemental statement of the case.
- Whole decision: DeniedSeptember 2007
The veteran's bilateral hearing loss is evaluated as noncompensable (0 percent disabling). The right ear scar is currently rated at 30 percent. Headaches are rated as 10 percent disabling from April 14, 2003 to March 28, 2006 and as 10 percent thereafter. Generalized anxiety disorder is rated as 30 percent disabling.,The veteran's bilateral hearing loss does not meet the criteria for a compensable rating.
- Whole decision: GrantedSeptember 2007
The veteran's burn scar to the right cheek has been rated as a facial scar, and is now assigned a 10% evaluation effective October 15, 2002.
- Whole decision: DeniedSeptember 2007
The Board has determined that the veteran's left hip scar warrants a 10 percent evaluation, but not higher. The evidence does not support a higher rating as there is no indication of pain or instability in the scar.
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.