The Veteran's claim for payment or reimbursement of unauthorized medical expenses incurred at Casa Grande Medical Center on October 24, 2005 was denied. The VAMC found that the VA was feasibly available and this was non-emergent. The Board has decided to remand the case due to a lack of records regarding contact with the Tucson VAMC.
The deciding factor: The VAMC's decision was based on the assumption that the Veteran could have been treated at the VA facility, which is not supported by evidence showing he contacted the VA before going to the private hospital. The Board has ordered additional action to obtain these records and ensure compliance with the Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000.
- Claimed conditions
- laceration
- How they argued it
- Not specified
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- May 10, 2010
- Citation
- 1017174
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 1017174.
What this means for you
A remand is not a loss. The Board sent the case back for more development — often a new exam or missing records — before making a final decision. Many remands later end in a grant, and the decision spells out exactly what the Board wanted to see.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Denied
The Veteran's right knee disability is rated at 10 percent for the entire period on appeal, and a separate rating of 20 percent for right knee lateral instability from December 26, 2019. The claim for an increased rating for chronic right knee strain, laceration, and contusion was denied.
- Denied
The Veteran's appeal for a higher rating for his service-connected left foot disability and compensable rating for left foot residual scars was denied. The Board found that the evidence did not support a higher rating than 20 percent for the left foot disability, as it is characterized by moderately severe symptomatology throughout the appeal period. For the left foot residual scars, the evidence did not meet the criteria for a compensable rating under Diagnostic Code 7802.
- Denied
The Veteran's appeal for a higher rating for his service-connected left foot disability and compensable rating for left foot residual scars was denied. The Board found that the evidence did not support a higher rating than 20 percent for the left foot disability, as it is characterized by moderately severe symptomatology throughout the appeal period. For the left foot residual scars, the evidence did not meet the criteria for a compensable rating under Diagnostic Code 7802.
- Denied
The Veteran's appeal for a higher rating for his service-connected left foot disability and compensable rating for left foot residual scars was denied. The Board found that the evidence did not support a higher rating than 20 percent for the left foot disability, as it is characterized by moderately severe symptomatology throughout the appeal period. For the left foot residual scars, the evidence did not meet the criteria for a compensable rating under Diagnostic Code 7802.
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.