The Board has remanded the case for further development, including obtaining an addendum medical opinion to determine if VA's heart surgery in March 2014 caused additional disability resulting from phrenic nerve injury and whether such disability was due to negligence or lack of informed consent.
The deciding factor: The examiner must provide a clear opinion on whether the Veteran received proper informed consent prior to the March 2014 heart procedure, including disclosure of risks like phrenic nerve injury and collapsed lung.
- Claimed conditions
- phrenic nerve injury, collapsed right lung, paralyzed right diaphragm
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- September 11, 2023
- Citation
- 23050314
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 23050314.
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.
- Granted
The Board has granted service connection for the Veteran's paralyzed right diaphragm as secondary to his service-connected fracture of cervical vertebra (C-7) with intervertebral disc syndrome and degenerative arthritis and foraminal stenosis, after finding that there is at least equipoise evidence supporting this claim.
- Denied
The claims for service connection for paralyzed diaphragm, right side and phrenic nerve injury are denied as new and relevant evidence has not been received. The claim for service connection for thoracic outlet syndrome, right shoulder is remanded due to a duty to assist error. The claim for service connection for erectile dysfunction is also remanded due to the PACT Act requiring a TERA-specific VA medical opinion.
- Denied
The Veteran's claims for diabetes mellitus, kidney disorder, heart disability, respiratory disability, thyroid disability, paralyzed right diaphragm, left toe fungus, and right toe fungus were denied as they are not related to service.,There was no evidence of herbicide exposure or asbestos exposure in the Veteran's service records.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case for further development, including verifying whether the Veteran's cardiac surgeon was a VA employee and obtaining an addendum medical opinion regarding any additional pneumothorax or pleural effusion disability due to fault on VA's part.
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.