The Board has determined that the August 1991 and November 1992 rating decisions were clearly and unmistakably erroneous in failing to recognize E.M.M. as a 'child' of the veteran on the basis of permanent incapacity for self-support prior to attaining the age of eighteen.
The deciding factor: The evidence showed that E.M.M. required continuous supervision due to her seizure disorder, which rendered her permanently incapable of self-support prior to reaching the age of eighteen.
- Claimed conditions
- Juvenile Myoclonic Epilepsy
- How they argued it
- Reopened with new and material evidence
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- October 16, 2006
- Citation
- 0631975
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 120 · Granted: 40% (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 0631975.
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 has decided that the Veteran's claim for an initial rating in excess of 40 percent for juvenile myoclonic epilepsy is remanded due to conflicting evidence regarding whether she has a nonpsychotic organic brain syndrome associated with her service-connected epilepsy, and because VA treatment records from Bluefield Regional Medical Center are needed.
- Denied
The Board has denied the veteran's claim for service connection for a seizure disorder, characterized as juvenile myoclonic epilepsy, finding that there is no medical evidence establishing a nexus between his current condition and any in-service head injury.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to the need for additional development, including obtaining SSA records and providing proper notice regarding secondary service connection.
- Granted
The Veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD was reopened due to the submission of new and material evidence. The appeal is granted as his PTSD is now considered service-connected.
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.