The Veteran's additional disabilities, including abdominal hernia, right leg lumbar plexopathy, erectile dysfunction, and head trauma with residuals of double vision and vertigo, are not considered to be a result of carelessness, negligence, or lack of proper skill on the part of VA. The complications were known potential outcomes of the AAA surgery.
The deciding factor: The medical evidence does not support a finding that the proximate cause of any additional disability was an event not reasonably foreseeable.
- Claimed conditions
- abdominal hernia, right leg lumbar plexopathy, erectile dysfunction, head trauma with residuals of double vision and vertigo
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- April 2, 2013
- Citation
- 1310825
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 1310825.
What this means for you
A denial is a starting point, not the end of the road. You can see why this claim fell short — and, if you are still inside the one-year window, the appeal lanes that may remain open to you.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Dismissed
The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for diabetes mellitus type II with erectile dysfunction was denied as the evidence did not show that he had been diagnosed and manifested to at least a 10 percent disability rating on or prior to May 8, 2001.
- Denied
The Board denied service connection for diabetes mellitus, prostate cancer, visual impairment, hypertension, and erectile dysfunction due to lack of exposure to herbicide agents during service. The Veteran's claims were not granted.
- Denied
The Board denied service connection for various conditions, including right shoulder disability, abdominal hernia, GERD, bilateral ankle disabilities, and bilateral foot disabilities. The evidence did not support a finding that these conditions were incurred or aggravated during the appellant's period of active duty.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has found that the Veteran meets the basic medical eligibility criteria for PCAFC benefits due to his need for personal care services based on symptoms or residuals of neurological or other impairment or injury. However, further clinical evaluation is needed to determine if participation in the program is in the Veteran's best interest.
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.