The Board has determined that the Veteran's medical expenses incurred at Saint Francis Hospital from May 3, 2008 to May 7, 2008 were for a continued medical emergency and thus eligible for reimbursement under VA policy.
The deciding factor: The evidence showed that the Veteran's condition was not stable enough to be safely transferred to a VA facility by May 7, 2008.
- Claimed conditions
- Nonservice-connected condition
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- February 24, 2010
- Citation
- 1006856
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 1006856.
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.
- Denied
The Veteran's claim for payment or reimbursement of medical expenses incurred at Wuesthoff Memorial Hospital from January 20, 1994 to January 30, 1994 was denied because the VA determined that he could have been safely transferred to a VA facility on January 20, 2004.
- Granted
The Veteran's unauthorized medical expenses incurred at Northside Hospital from August 30, 2006 to September 1, 2006 are now eligible for payment or reimbursement due to the presence of a serious threat to life or health that rendered immediate emergency care necessary.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for reimbursement of unauthorized private medical expenses incurred during hospitalization from February 15 to 17, 2006 at O.H. Hospital because the treatment was not for a continued medical emergency and did not meet the criteria for payment or reimbursement under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1725.
- 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.
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.