The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to his request for a hearing before a Veterans Law Judge at the RO.
The deciding factor: The Veteran requested a hearing, and this matter must be handled in an expeditious manner as per VA regulations.
- Claimed conditions
- paresis of the right lower extremity, paresis of the right upper extremity, paresis of the left lower extremity, residuals of colloid brain cyst, third ventricle
- How they argued it
- Not specified
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- April 7, 2011
- Citation
- 1113738
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 1113738.
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.
- Granted
The Veteran's service-connected disabilities have precluded her from securing or following a substantially gainful occupation since at least November 21, 2013. The Board finds that the criteria for entitlement to a TDIU have been met.
- Denied
The Veteran's paresis of the right lower extremity, right upper extremity, and left lower extremity have been rated at their maximum under applicable diagnostic codes. No higher ratings are warranted.
- Granted
The Board has granted higher disability evaluations for the veteran's service-connected conditions, including loss of use of both lower extremities (100%), urinary incontinence (60% since June 9, 2005), bowel incontinence (30%), paresis of the left upper extremity (30%), and paresis of the right upper extremity (20%). The veteran's nystagmus remains at a 10% rating.
- Granted
The Board finds that the appellant's current disabilities, including paresis of the right lower extremity, impotence, and incontinence, are likely related to a motor vehicle accident during active duty training (ACDUTRA) in 1958. Therefore, service connection for residuals of a back injury is granted.
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.