Scars decisions — 2012
683 indexed Board decisions in 2012.
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: GrantedNovember 2012
The Veteran's service connection claim for residuals of a right hand laceration, including posttraumatic scarring and a retained foreign body at the distal right fifth metacarpal, is granted as these conditions are found to be etiologically related to active duty service.
- Whole decision: DeniedNovember 2012
The Veteran's claims for service connection were denied, and the claim to reopen a back disorder was also denied. The Veteran's PTSD is currently rated at 70 percent.
- Whole decision: DeniedNovember 2012
The Veteran's claim for an initial evaluation in excess of 10 percent for right ilio-inguinal nerve entrapment was denied.,Service connection for a pulmonary disability (originally claimed as scar tissue of the lungs) was granted, but not with an effective date earlier than April 25, 2005.,The Veteran's claim for an effective date prior to April 25, 2005 for the award of service connection for a right inguinal hernia repair scar must be dismissed as his appeal was untimely.
- Whole decision: GrantedNovember 2012
The Veteran's right shoulder disorder with scars is rated at 20 percent effective from October 11, 2011. Prior to that date, the disability was rated as noncompensable.
- Whole decision: DeniedOctober 2012
The Veteran's claims for increased ratings and service connection were denied. The Board found no evidence of disfigurement or other criteria warranting a compensable rating for scars on the neck, and denied his claims for increased ratings for degenerative arthritis of the right acromioclavicular joint prior to May 12, 2011 and since that date. Service connection was also denied for cervical spine disorder and right hip disorder.
- Whole decision: DeniedOctober 2012
The Board denied the Veteran's request for an earlier effective date for service connection due to lack of evidence that could change the assigned effective date, which is August 16, 2005.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)October 2012
The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development, including an eye examination to determine the relationship between his glaucoma and service-connected bilateral photosensitivity with a left chorioretinal scar.
- Whole decision: GrantedOctober 2012
The Veteran's service-connected gunshot wound of the left foot and ankle with traumatic arthritis and scars, as well as his left knee disability, are rated at 30 percent. The Board granted these ratings.
- Whole decision: DismissedOctober 2012
The Veteran has withdrawn his appeals regarding the increased evaluations for a scar of the left hip and reflex sympathetic dystrophy.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)October 2012
The Veteran's appeal is remanded for additional development, including an examination to assess any functional impairment caused by his service-connected residual scar status post lipoma removal.
- Whole decision: DismissedOctober 2012
The Veteran's appeal has been withdrawn, and the case is dismissed.
- Whole decision: GrantedOctober 2012
The Veteran's chloracne is presumed to have been incurred in service due to exposure to Agent Orange.,Tinnitus, headaches, left eyelid weakness, scars on chest and legs, facial reconstruction scars, and tinea corporis, tinea pedis, and allergic contact dermatitis are all found to be related to service.
- Whole decision: GrantedOctober 2012
The Board has granted service connection for bilateral hearing loss and a residual scar status post cystectomy of the scalp, finding that the Veteran's current diagnoses are related to his military service exposure. The effective date is not specified as it represents full award.
- Whole decision: DeniedOctober 2012
The Veteran's service-connected appendectomy scar is not painful or unstable and does not manifest any other disabling effects. The VA examiner found the scar to have no significant impact on his occupation as a supervisor of highway maintenance or on his usual daily activities.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)October 2012
The Board has remanded the case for further development, including an updated VA examination to address whether fecal leakage is a consequence of the service-connected pilonidal cyst scar. The Veteran may be eligible for separate compensable evaluations under Diagnostic Code 7332 (for impairment of sphincter control) and/or an extraschedular evaluation if his disability picture is found to be exceptional.
- Whole decision: DeniedOctober 2012
The Veteran's claim for increased ratings for his service-connected scars and PTSD have been denied. The scars are currently rated noncompensable, while the PTSD remains at 30 percent.
- Whole decision: DeniedOctober 2012
The Board finds that the Veteran's scar on the left palm does not meet the criteria for a compensable rating under the skin disability evaluation criteria.
- Whole decision: DeniedOctober 2012
The Veteran's service-connected conditions did not contribute to his death from cardiac arrest and diabetes. The Board found that PTSD was not the cause of death, but rather a contributing factor.
- Whole decision: DeniedOctober 2012
The Veteran's service-connected disabilities, including bilateral hearing loss (rated at 50%), hemorrhoids (30%), tinnitus (10%), and scars on his scalp and left eyelid (noncompensable), combine to a total rating of 70%. However, the most probative medical evidence does not indicate these conditions are so severe as to preclude him from obtaining and maintaining substantially gainful employment.
- Whole decision: DismissedOctober 2012
The Veteran's appeals for increased ratings for bilateral hearing loss and scars from shrapnel wounds to the left calf, ankle, and foot have been withdrawn. The appeal for competency to handle disbursement of funds has also been withdrawn.
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.