The Veteran's unauthorized private medical expenses incurred from January 19, 2004 to January 20, 2004 are now covered by VA as the evidence shows that VA facilities were not feasibly available and informed of the Veteran's condition.
The deciding factor: Correspondence between Saint Francis Hospital and VA demonstrated that VA was aware of the Veteran's condition and would have accepted transfer to a VA facility if feasible, resolving all doubts in favor of the Veteran.
- Claimed conditions
- chest and abdominal pain
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- June 12, 2009
- Citation
- 0922285
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 0922285.
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: Granted
The Board finds that the appellant's treatment for chest and abdominal pain, which was not an emergency requiring immediate medical attention, met the criteria for reimbursement of unauthorized medical expenses incurred from March 17 to March 18, 2010.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board denied all claims of service connection for various conditions due to undiagnosed illness, finding no objective evidence supporting the veteran's assertions.
- Whole decision: 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.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for an initial evaluation in excess of 10 percent for his service-connected coronary artery disease, finding that the evidence did not support a higher rating based on the severity of his condition.
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.