CAVC Case 02-1108: Back
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · September 14, 2004 · KRAMER, Chief Judge
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
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
BackHearing LossHipEye
Why It Was Decided This Way
In the March 2002 BVA decision here on appeal, the Board denied to the appellant basic eligibility for VA benefits.
The Board noted that the appellant's VA Form 9 and his DD Form 214 reflected that he had served in the Merchant Marine from August 28, 1945, through December 31, 1946, but stated that under 38 C.
The Board concluded that the appellant's service between August 28, 1945, and December 31, 1946, did not establish active-duty service for status as a "veteran".
The Board determined that "the largest obstacle confronting the appellant" was that his DD Form 214 reflected service dates from August 28, 1945, to December 31, 1946, because under 38 C.
Contentions on Appeal In his initial brief, the appellant contends that the March 2002 BVA decision should be reversed as clearly erroneous because the Board relied on 38 C.
14(d), which does not apply to the issue whether he has established veteran 6 status; (2) failed to consider his service between July 3, 1945, when he enlisted in the Merchant Marine, and August 15, 1945; (3) failed to determine whether his DD Form 214 accurately reflected his service dates; and (4) failed to address whether his July 1945 service may be construed as "active[-]duty service" for establishing veteran status.
hat he joined the Merchant Marine on July 3, 1945, and was sworn in two days later and (2) that the Board erred by not considering official documents reflecting those dates.
In order for this Court to reverse a BVA decision on a finding of fact, we must find that the BVA decision was "clearly erroneous".
Authorities Cited
Regulations Cited (38 CFR / 38 USC)
Denial Type
Credibility
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 →