The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient reasons provided for denying dependency and indemnity compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for the cause of the Veteran’s death, specifically addressing issues related to VA's medical treatment and discharge.
The deciding factor: The decision is remanded because the Board failed to adequately address the appellant's contentions regarding VA's failure to provide adequate medical treatment and its negligence in discharging the Veteran home from hospital.
- Claimed conditions
- Non-alcoholic cirrhosis of the liver, Ketoconazole shampoo therapy
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- December 12, 2019
- Citation
- 19193050
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,037 · Granted: 21% (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 19193050.
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 has decided to remand the case due to insufficient evidence regarding when and how the Veteran may have contracted hepatitis C, which led to his liver failure.
- Denied
The Veteran's death was not caused by any negligence or fault on the part of VA in providing medical care. The Board found no causal connection between the Veteran’s death and any hospital care, medical or surgical treatment provided by VA.
- Denied
The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased ratings for his service-connected lumbar myositis, psychoneurosis and conversion hysteria, residuals of shrapnel wounds of the left thigh and pelvis with retained foreign bodies and scars, and residuals of shell fragment wounds of the right thigh and left leg. The veteran was also denied entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for an initial evaluation in excess of 10 percent for his service-connected coronary artery disease, finding that the evidence did not support a higher rating based on the severity of his condition.
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.