The Board has granted the Veteran's claim for service connection of a stroke as secondary to his service-connected DM II, finding that the evidence is at least equipoise on whether the stroke was caused or aggravated by his service-connected diabetes.
The deciding factor: The medical opinions provided are in equipoise regarding whether the Veteran’s service-connected diabetes (DM II) caused or aggravated his stroke.
- Claimed conditions
- Stroke, DM II
- How they argued it
- Secondary to another service-connected condition
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- October 6, 2020
- Citation
- 20064963
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 2,036 · Granted: 27% (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 20064963.
What this means for you
A grant means the Board allowed the benefit or issue identified in this decision. Review the original order: other issues in the same appeal may have a different outcome, and this decision does not predict another claim.
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: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that remand is required for several issues, including service connection for stroke and memory loss, as well as an increased rating for PTSD. The AOJ must verify the Veteran's claimed in-service exposures, obtain all relevant treatment records, and provide a medical nexus opinion regarding the nature of his disabilities.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board found that the Veteran does not require personal care services for a minimum of six continuous months due to his ability to perform activities of daily living independently and manage his health without assistance.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for service connection due to incomplete records and the need for additional medical opinions. The Veteran's hypertension is presumed based on exposure under the PACT Act.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that the VA medical providers who treated the Veteran prescribed lisinopril and HCTZ despite his allergy, and it is unclear if he was informed of all risks. The Board also needs to determine if any of these medications caused a stroke or if a stroke was foreseeable given his allergy.
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.