The Board has determined that the appellant's current nose scar is the residual of a knife attack in service, resulting in lacerations to his nose and right hand. As such, the Board finds that there is an approximate balance between positive and negative evidence with regard to the claim for service connection for a scar on the nose.
The deciding factor: The appellant presented credible evidence regarding the laceration he sustained to his nose from a knife attack in service, which resulted in visible residuals including a residual scar. The VA physician who examined the appellant diagnosed the nose scar as a residual from a stab wound and provided a nexus opinion linking the scars to injury in service.
- Claimed conditions
- scar on the nose
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- September 26, 2003
- Citation
- 0325082
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 0325082.
What this means for you
A grant means the Board agreed the veteran was entitled to the benefit. Decisions like this show the kind of evidence and arguments that tend to succeed for claims like it.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Denied
The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased ratings for his service-connected lumbar myositis, psychoneurosis and conversion hysteria, residuals of shrapnel wounds of the left thigh and pelvis with retained foreign bodies and scars, and residuals of shell fragment wounds of the right thigh and left leg. The veteran was also denied entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board remands the issue of entitlement to service connection for a back disability due to a duty to assist error, specifically regarding VA's failure to provide the Veteran with a VA examination prior to the rating decision.
- Granted
The Board granted a 50 percent rating for the Veteran's migraine headaches based on prostrating attacks occurring more than once a month and severe economic inadaptability.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's appeal for special monthly compensation based on loss of use of his left foot, as there was no evidence showing that the service-connected conditions resulted in functional limitation equal to that of amputation of the left foot with prosthesis.
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.