CAVC Case 04-1646: PTSD
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · 2004-06-21 · HAGEL , 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
Service ConnectionPTSD
Why It Was Decided This Way
The appellant appeals through counsel a June 21, 2004, Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) decision wherein the Board denied service connection for post- traumatic stress disorder on the ground that the in-service stressors the appellant.
The Board found, however, that there was no probative supporting evidence that a claimed stressor actually occurred.
The Board noted, but did not discuss, the written statements from fellow service members concerning the claimed stressors.
The appellant argues that the Board decision should be reversed as clearly erroneous because the Board disregarded extensive evidence in the record that he served in combat and, in the alternative, extensive credible evidence that supports his claimed in-service stressors.
Minimally, he argues that the Board should have found the evidence in equipoise and given him the benefit of the doubt, so the Court should reverse the Board's decision.
In the alternative, he argues that, at a minimum, the Board decision should be vacated and the matter remanded because the Board failed to provide an adequate statement of reasons or bases in that it failed to discuss how the evidence in the record fails to corroborate that the appellant.
The appellant's unit from the Marine Corps Historical Center, History and Museums Division, and because the Board's statement of reasons or basis is inadequate in that it failed to consider evidence that supports the appellant.
dence that a claimed in-service stressor actually occurred, and (3) medical evidence establishing a nexus between the claimed in-service stressor and the current symptomatology of the post-traumatic stress disorder.
Authorities Cited
Denial Type
Credibility|No Nexus
Find Similar Decisions 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 →