The Veteran's claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for residuals from prostate surgery incurred as a result of VA surgical treatment in January 2012 is denied because the evidence does not show that the medical professionals involved were negligent or that an unforeseeable event caused his disability.
The deciding factor: The VA urologist's opinion concluded there was no evidence of carelessness, negligence, lack of proper skill, error in judgment, or any other instance of fault by the VA in the furnishing of hospital care for the prostate surgery.
- Claimed conditions
- bladder incontinence, urinary tract infections
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- March 20, 2019
- Citation
- 19120262
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 2,050 · Granted: 23% (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 19120262.
What this means for you
A dismissal means the Board did not decide the issue on its merits — usually because it was withdrawn or had become moot. It says more about procedure than about whether a claim like this can win.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for service connection due to incomplete evidence, specifically VA treatment records from 'SAMMC'. The Veteran is also required to undergo a secondary service connection opinion regarding his sleep deprivation claim.
- Granted
The Veteran's dysphagia and erectile dysfunction are found to be secondary to his service-connected major depressive disorder with generalized anxiety disorder.,Bladder incontinence is denied as there is no evidence linking it to a service-connected condition.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case due to a duty-to-assist error and additional VA medical opinions are needed regarding the Veteran's service connection claims.
- Denied
The Board denied service connection for vaginal conditions, gastric bypass with residual hernias, bilateral knee conditions, bilateral shin splints, and bilateral foot conditions as they were not found to be related to the Veteran's service or service-connected disabilities.
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.