CAVC Case 02-1012: PTSD
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · September 3, 2004 · IVERS
This is a decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims — the federal court that reviews Board of Veterans' Appeals decisions, one level above the Board. Court decisions can vacate, reverse, or affirm what the Board did.
Official 2026 VA monthly compensation, including the 2.8% COLA increase.
Dependent add-ons start at a 30% rating. Child-only and dependent-parent rates: see the full 2026 pay chart.
2026 base rates, all ratings (veteran alone)
| Rating | Monthly (2026, incl. 2.8% COLA) |
|---|---|
| 10% | $180.42 |
| 20% | $356.66 |
| 30% | $552.47 |
| 40% | $795.84 |
| 50% | $1,132.90 |
| 60% | $1,435.02 |
| 70% | $1,808.45 |
| 80% | $2,102.15 |
| 90% | $2,362.30 |
| 100% | $3,938.58 |
Conditions Claimed
PTSDPsychiatricBackKneeHipHeartEye
Referral disclosure: VetAid earns a referral fee if you become a paying REE Medical client through this link — it helps keep this site free. REE Medical provides paid medical evidence; it is not a law firm, VSO, or claims agent, and VetAid has not independently verified its services. VSOs and VA-accredited representatives will help you file your claim at no cost, and no one can guarantee a rating increase.
Issues on Appeal
PTSDPsychiatricBackKneeHipHeartEye
Why It Was Decided This Way
Army Environmental Support Group (ESG) informed the RO that both Chu Lai and Landing Zone English were attacked in 1967, but that, in order for the ESG to provide further research concerning specific combat incidents, the veteran must provide additional information, including specific dates, type, and location of incidents, full names of casualties, and unit designations.
In an August 6, 1999, decision, the Board denied service connection for PTSD.
The Board concluded that the veteran did not engage in combat with the enemy and that there was no credible supporting evidence confirming the claimed stressors.
In the June 2002 BVA decision here on appeal, the Board denied service connection for PTSD, after finding that (1) by a preponderance of the evidence, the veteran did not engage in combat with the enemy while serving in Vietnam (R.
Contentions of Parties The appellant urges the Court to reverse as clearly erroneous the Board's finding that he did not engage in combat with the enemy and to remand the matter to the Board to apply the combat presumption of section 1154(b).
The appellant also argues that the Board failed to provide an adequate statement of reasons or bases for its conclusion that he did not engage in combat with the 7 enemy.
Applicable Law and Regulations To support a claim for service connection for PTSD, a claimant must present evidence of (1) a current diagnosis of PTSD; (2) credible supporting evidence that the claimed in-service stressor actually occurred; and (3) medical evidence of a causal nexus between the current symptomatology and the claimed in-service stressor.
The Board's finding of noncombat status is a finding of fact that the Court reviews under a "clearly erroneous" standard of review pursuant to 38 U.
Authorities Cited
Regulations Cited (38 CFR / 38 USC)
Denial Type
Credibility|No Nexus|Preponderance Against|Duty To Assist
Find Similar Precedent for Your Claim
VetAid's analyzer maps your claim against thousands of real Board of Veterans' Appeals decisions like this one — surfacing the exact case law that supports your arguments.
Run my claim through VetAid →