The Board found that the enucleation of the veteran's right eye was a result of negligence on the part of VA physicians during a routine cataract surgery in December 2001, and thus warranted compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151.
The deciding factor: The Board determined that the enucleation resulted from carelessness or negligence by VA personnel during the surgical treatment.
- Claimed conditions
- enucleation of the right eye
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- January 18, 2006
- Citation
- 0601555
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,555 · Granted: 19% (granted or partly granted, in the indexed 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. Search VA.gov for the original decision (opens in a new tab) using citation 0601555.
What this means for you
A grant means the Board allowed the benefit or issue identified in this decision. Review the original order: other issues in the same appeal may have a different outcome, and this decision does not predict another claim.
What you can do next
Use your own notice and decision stage. A remanded issue is not a final court-appealable denial. VA review guidance and CAVC filing instructions (U.S. federal; reviewed October 7, 2026).
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete development of records related to whether the Veteran was required to pay for his medical expenses while incarcerated. The VA needs to obtain non-medical evidence from the Oklahoma Department of Corrections and other entities.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board is remanding the case to obtain records from the Oklahoma Department of Corrections regarding the Veteran's medical expenses and whether he had been required to pay out-of-pocket for his service-connected disabilities.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Veteran's service-connected disabilities of the right eye, left hand and left arm are found to likely prevent him from securing and following substantially gainful employment.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board denied an effective date before November 7, 2003 for the grant of nonservice-connected pension and a rating higher than 40 percent for enucleation of the right eye. The case is being remanded to obtain VA records from Dr. Clearihue's treatment in Los Angeles.
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.