The Veteran's emergency medical treatment at Hillcrest Medical Center was deemed necessary due to an emergent condition, and the nearest available appropriate level of care was provided by the VA South Central Health Care Network in Jackson, Mississippi. The Board finds that payment or reimbursement is warranted based on these circumstances.
The deciding factor: The emergency treatment was deemed necessary due to an emergent condition, and a VA facility was not feasibly available for the Veteran's care.
- Claimed conditions
- atriial tachycardia
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- February 3, 2014
- Citation
- 1404700
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. Read the original VA decision (opens in a new tab) using citation 1404700.
What this means for you
A grant means the Board allowed the benefit or issue identified in this decision. Review the original order: other issues in the same appeal may have a different outcome, and this decision does not predict another claim.
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: Granted
The Board has granted service connection for hypertension, sleep apnea, and supraventricular and atrial tachycardia as secondary to the Veteran's service-connected generalized anxiety disorder.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Board has determined that the Veteran's additional heart disabilities, including atrial fibrillation, atypical atrial flutters, atrial tachycardia, and vasovagal triggers, were caused by VA negligence in performing his right knee surgery in October 2004. As a result, the appeal is granted.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence regarding the Veteran's heart disorders, including whether they are related to service and exposure to herbicides. A VA examination is required.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence regarding the relationship between the Veteran's service-connected atrial fibrillation and atrial tachycardia, as well as his current manifestations of these conditions.
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.