The Veteran's unauthorized medical expenses incurred at a private hospital on February 2, 2016 are being remanded for further development to determine if the treatment was necessary due to a 'medical emergency' and whether a VA facility was feasibly available.
The deciding factor: The Board found that additional evidence is needed to determine if the Veteran's private hospitalization was for a 'medical emergency' and if a VA facility was available at the time of his visit.
- Claimed conditions
- disequilibrium, alcohol abuse, facial paresthesias
- How they argued it
- Not specified
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- February 13, 2019
- Citation
- 19111259
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 2,156 · Granted: 29% (granted or partly granted, in the indexed 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. Read the original VA decision (opens in a new tab) using citation 19111259.
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 has denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for unspecified depressive disorder with anxious distress and alcohol abuse, finding that there is no evidence of a current disability or a link to active service.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Veteran's claims for service connection for alcohol abuse and drug abuse, as well as a rating in excess of 70 percent for PTSD, were denied. The Board found that the evidence did not meet the criteria for a higher rating or secondary service connection.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to a lack of VA examination for service connection of an acquired psychiatric disorder, including anxiety and substance abuse disorders.
- Whole decision: Denied
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.