The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient medical opinions regarding whether VA's actions or inactions caused the Veteran's death from septic shock. The Appellant is seeking compensation for her husband's death, but the VA needs to obtain additional private medical records and provide a new opinion on the issue.
The deciding factor: The Board found that there was not enough information provided by the VA examiner regarding whether VA's actions or inactions caused the Veteran's death from septic shock.
- Claimed conditions
- Urinary Tract Infection, Septic Shock
- How they argued it
- Not specified
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- November 14, 2019
- Citation
- 19185925
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 19185925.
What this means for you
A remand is not a loss. The Board sent the case back for more development — often a new exam or missing records — before making a final decision. Many remands later end in a grant, and the decision spells out exactly what the Board wanted to see.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board remands the case to obtain a medical opinion addressing whether the Veteran's service-connected PTSD caused or aggravated his cardiovascular diseases, which were listed as contributing causes of death.
- Granted
The Board granted an earlier effective date of May 29, 2018, for the grant of total disability based on individual unemployability (TDIU).
- Denied
The Veteran's claim for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disability, other than PTSD, prostate cancer, erectile dysfunction, benign prostatic hypertrophy and prostatitis, urinary tract infection, urine retention, bladder incontinence, nocturia, obesity, cataracts, and fatigue was denied. The Board found that the evidence did not support a finding of service connection for any of these conditions.
- Denied
The Veteran's unauthorized medical expenses incurred at a private hospital on September 16, 2016 were denied because there was no emergency situation warranting treatment at the private facility and VA facilities were feasibly available.
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.