The Board has denied the Veteran's claims for compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 due to complications from a March 2006 partial nephrectomy at the Denver VAMC, finding that there is no evidence of negligence or fault on VA's part and that the additional disability was reasonably foreseeable.
The deciding factor: The Board found that the Veteran's residuals from his March 2006 partial nephrectomy were not due to carelessness, negligence, lack of proper skill, error in judgment, or similar instance of fault on the part of VA. The opinions provided by medical professionals did not indicate any negligence or fault on VA’s part and neuropathy and pain were listed as potential risks on the consent form signed by the Veteran.
- Claimed conditions
- abdominal inflammation, groin inflammation, nerve and muscle damage
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- February 22, 2021
- Citation
- 21009531
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 21009531.
What this means for you
A denial is a starting point, not the end of the road. You can see why this claim fell short — and, if you are still inside the one-year window, the appeal lanes that may remain open to you.
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 case for a clarification of the opinions provided by the VA physician, as they are not sufficient to decide the claims. The Veteran needs an advisory opinion from a urologic surgeon regarding the nature and cause of his additional disabilities.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 due to insufficient evidence regarding the cause of the Veteran's current disabilities and whether they are related to his VA surgery in March 2006.
- Denied
The Board has denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for residuals of a snake bite and an initial compensable disability rating for bilateral hearing loss.
- 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.
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.