The Board has remanded the case for a new VA medical opinion to determine if the Veteran incurred additional disability as a result of the April 2016 eye surgery and whether any such disability was caused by negligence or lack of proper skill on the part of VA.
The deciding factor: The examiner must address whether the identified left eye impairment is due to carelessness, negligence, lack of proper skill, error in judgment or other instance of fault on the part of VA.
- Claimed conditions
- left eye impairment
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- October 17, 2022
- Citation
- 22058046
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 22058046.
What this means for you
A remand sends an issue back for more development, often a new examination or missing records. It does not award the benefit or decide the final outcome. The original decision explains the additional work ordered.
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 for further examination and opinion regarding the Veteran's claim of compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 due to alleged negligence during a left eye surgery in April 2016.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided that the Veteran's claim for a rating in excess of 30 percent for head and face scars needs further examination, as there was not substantial compliance with previous remand directives. The case is being sent back to obtain VA treatment records and schedule an eye impairment examination.
- Denied
The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for Bell's palsy and left eye impairment due to cranial nerve dysfunction, finding that these conditions were not related to his head injury in service.
- 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.