The veteran's claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 was denied because there is no competent medical evidence of record that the stroke suffered post-operatively to the May 1996 coronary artery bypass graft was caused by VA hospitalization, medical treatment, or surgical treatment in May and June 1996.
The deciding factor: The Board found that there is no competent medical opinion showing that residuals of a stroke were proximately caused by carelessness, negligence, lack of proper skill, error in judgment, or similar instance of fault on the part of VA in furnishing the hospital care, medical or surgical treatment.
- Claimed conditions
- Stroke
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- March 15, 2000
- Citation
- 0006986
This is a plain-language summary generated by AI from a public Board of Veterans’ Appeals decision. It can contain errors — always verify against the original. Look up the original decision on VA.gov (opens in a new tab) using citation 0006986.
What this means for you
A denial is a starting point, not the end of the road. You can see why this claim fell short — and, if you are still inside the one-year window, the appeal lanes that may remain open to you.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that remand is required for several issues, including service connection for stroke and memory loss, as well as an increased rating for PTSD. The AOJ must verify the Veteran's claimed in-service exposures, obtain all relevant treatment records, and provide a medical nexus opinion regarding the nature of his disabilities.
- Denied
The Board found that the Veteran does not require personal care services for a minimum of six continuous months due to his ability to perform activities of daily living independently and manage his health without assistance.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for service connection due to incomplete records and the need for additional medical opinions. The Veteran's hypertension is presumed based on exposure under the PACT Act.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that the VA medical providers who treated the Veteran prescribed lisinopril and HCTZ despite his allergy, and it is unclear if he was informed of all risks. The Board also needs to determine if any of these medications caused a stroke or if a stroke was foreseeable given his allergy.
Free starter guide for your own claim
Reading this because you were denied or under-rated? Get the plain-English next steps — your appeal options, the deadline that protects you, and how appeals like yours turn out. One email, no spam.
We will only use this to send the guide. No spam, unsubscribe any time. We never sell your information.
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.