The Board has determined that the veteran's current residuals of a cerebrovascular accident are likely due to VA treatment in May 1994, and thus grants compensation benefits under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151.
The deciding factor: The recent medical opinion concluded that the early discharge on May 20, 1994 would have prudently been recorded as against medical advice, suggesting VA's failure to properly diagnose and treat the veteran's condition increased his likelihood of a stroke.
- Claimed conditions
- Cerebrovascular accident
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- April 8, 2004
- Citation
- 0409197
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,599 · Granted: 37% (granted or partly granted, in the vetted decisions on this site)
Judge attribution: 2025 complete; earlier years partial.
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 0409197.
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.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board remands the claims for service connection for adrenal gland tumor, hypertension, enlarged node of the breast, congestive heart failure, kidney disability, pulmonary edema, cerebrovascular accident, Conn's disease, and paralysis of left lower extremity to obtain a VA examination and opinion.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the issue of service connection for residuals of cerebrovascular accident, as secondary to service-connected hypertension. The Veteran's claim will be further evaluated with an addendum opinion.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's appeal is remanded due to the need for a medical opinion regarding the etiology of his cerebrovascular accident, which caused his visual field defect.
- Denied
The Board denied the claim for service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death, finding that there was no evidence to support exposure to herbicides during active service and thus denying presumptive service connection.
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.