The Board denied compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for residuals of inguinal hernia surgery, finding that the proximate cause of any additional disability was reasonably foreseeable and not due to VA's carelessness or negligence.
The deciding factor: The Board found no evidence of actual causation by VA in providing the medical treatment, as well as no fault on VA’s part. The event (the hernia repair) was also not unforeseeable.
- Claimed conditions
- inguinal hernia, weakness, limitation of motion, instability of the right leg, erectile dysfunction, urinary dysfunction
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- January 23, 2019
- Citation
- 19104940
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 2,035 · Granted: 30% (granted or partly granted, in the vetted decisions on this site)
Judge attribution: 2025 complete; earlier years partial.
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 19104940.
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.
- Partly granted
The Board has not made a final determination on the claims of service connection for inguinal hernia, PTSD, joint pain, fibromyalgia, left knee disability, right knee disability, tinnitus, chronic fatigue syndrome, respiratory disability, sleep disorder, IBS, and headaches. The claims are remanded to obtain additional evidence and determine if these conditions are related to service.
- 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.
- 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.