The Board has decided that the case should be returned for further development due to incomplete records and an insufficient VA opinion. The appellant contends that the Veteran's death was caused by a surgery performed by the VA, which led to infection.
The deciding factor: The VA examiner did not address the appellant’s contention regarding post-surgery drainage and subsequent infection.
- Claimed conditions
- Death
- How they argued it
- Not specified
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- December 26, 2018
- Citation
- 18160217
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 18160217.
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: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to issues with informed consent documentation and a need for additional development regarding the etiology of the Veteran's death.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board denied the Appellant's petition to reopen her claim for DIC benefits, finding that new and material evidence had not been submitted. The original denial was based on an administrative decision in April 1977 which concluded she was barred from receiving VA compensation due to involvement in her husband's murder.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient information regarding whether VA's care and treatment of the Veteran contributed to his death. The Appellant contends that the Veteran’s death was caused by negligent VA treatment following surgery performed on his right ear.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the DIC claim due to insufficient evidence regarding whether VA's care or treatment caused the Veteran's death. The appellant argues that VA was negligent in prescribing Loratadine, which she contends had complications when combined with his heart condition.
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.