The Veteran's loss of use of the feet was not incurred in or aggravated by military service and is not related to his service-connected spondylolisthesis at L5-S1 with lumbosacral strain. The requirements for SMC based on loss of use of the feet have not been met.
The deciding factor: The VA examiners found that the Veteran's foot disability was less likely than not due to his low back disability and provided no evidence or reasoning supporting a different conclusion.
- Claimed conditions
- loss of use of the feet
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- December 15, 2009
- Citation
- 0947467
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 0947467.
What this means for you
A final Board denial may be appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, generally within 120 days of the Board mailing date. A Supplemental Claim with new and relevant evidence is a separate option. Another Higher-Level Review of the Board decision is not available. Check your own notice: this historical decision does not set your deadline.
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 Veteran's claim for higher levels of special monthly compensation (SMC) based on need for aid and attendance is being remanded due to its inextricability with a separate claim for SMC based on loss of use of the feet. The matter will be adjudicated after the separately remanded claim for SMC based on loss of use of the legs/feet is decided.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to a pre-decisional duty to assist error, specifically regarding private podiatric treatment records. The Veteran is asked to provide these records for further review.
- Whole decision: Dismissed
The Board has dismissed the appeal because the appellant opted into the modernized appeals system and withdrew her legacy appeal by submitting a VA Form 10182, which challenged the effective dates for service connection and SMC.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for service connection, financial assistance in purchasing a vehicle, and specially adaptive housing due to missing VA treatment records. The case will be returned to the RO for readjudication.
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.