The Board has determined that further development is needed to determine the nature and etiology of any left elbow and left wrist disorders, including whether they are related to service or secondary to a service-connected condition.
The deciding factor: Further medical examination is required to address the Veteran's claims for service connection due to conflicting evidence in the file and gaps in the record regarding his claimed injuries during service.
- Claimed conditions
- left elbow disorder, left wrist disorder
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- December 10, 2019
- Citation
- 19192587
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 19192587.
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 claim for a left wrist disorder to obtain an addendum opinion, as the previous opinions were based on inaccurate factual premises.
- Partly granted
The Board dismissed the claims for service connection for right and left lower extremity, lumbar radiculopathy as they were already granted. The claims for service connection for a right hip disorder, left hip disorder, right elbow disorder, left elbow disorder, and cervical spine disorder are remanded for further development.
- Granted
The Board granted service connection for a left wrist disorder, resolving all reasonable doubt in the Veteran's favor.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for special monthly compensation (SMC) based on loss of use of his left wrist, as the evidence did not support a finding that he had no effective function in the hand other than what would be equally well served by an amputation stump at the site of election below the elbow with use of a suitable prosthetic appliance.
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.