The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for dental disability for compensation and treatment purposes due to the extraction of tooth number 18 during his military service. The Board found that the condition was not compensable as a result of trauma or disease, but rather as part of routine dental treatment.
The deciding factor: The Board determined that the veteran's claim was precluded by law since the loss of the tooth was due to its non-restorable state at entry into service and did not meet the criteria for compensation under applicable regulations.
- Claimed conditions
- tooth extraction
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- May 3, 2002
- Citation
- 0204111
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 0204111.
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.
- Denied
The Veteran's claims for service connection and TDIU were denied. Service connection was not granted as there is no evidence of a dental disability that began during active service or is otherwise related to an in-service injury or disease.
- Partly granted
The Board denied service connection for bilateral hearing loss and hyperlipidemia. All other issues were remanded for further evaluation.
- Denied
The VA denied the Veteran's claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 because there was no evidence of fault on the part of VA in providing dental treatment, and informed consent was obtained.
- Granted
The Veteran's claim for compensation for tooth extraction, loss of sense of taste, and nerve deadening is denied. The claim for service connection for frostbite of the bilateral lower extremities has been reopened due to new evidence submitted since the previous denial in 2010. However, the Board finds that there is no evidence to support a finding of frostbite or cold injury residuals resulting from service.
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.