The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development to clarify the nature and etiology of his toe and foot disorders, as well as to obtain a new VA examination to determine the current severity of his service-connected left nephrectomy with normal right kidney with scar.
The deciding factor: The Board found inconsistencies in the January 2014 VA examination report regarding the Veteran's toe and foot complaints and requested clarification from the examiner. Additionally, the Veteran's hypertension disorder was not addressed in the June 2009 VA examination, which is why a new examination is needed.
- Claimed conditions
- hammer toe, hallux valgus
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- April 29, 2014
- Citation
- 1418975
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 1418975.
What this means for you
A remand sends an issue back for more development, often a new examination or missing records. It does not award the benefit or decide the final outcome. The original decision explains the additional work ordered.
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: Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for hallux valgus, finding no competent and credible evidence linking her current condition to active service.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Veteran's left foot metatarsalgia is granted as secondary to his service-connected left foot Lisfranc fracture and other disabilities. The Veteran's TDIU benefits from December 1, 2023 are denied due to his employment as a government tax collector.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case due to an inadequate VA examination, requiring a new one with a proper evaluation of the Veteran's foot disabilities.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient medical opinions regarding the preexistence and aggravation of foot disabilities during service.
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.