BVA Case 08-0816: Back

Real Board of Veterans' Appeals decision · March 31,2011 · SCHOELEN, Judge

Outcome
Remanded / Vacated
Decision Date
March 31,2011
Judge
SCHOELEN, Judge
Service Era
Not specified

Conditions Claimed

BackHearing_LossShoulderHeadacheSkinGiEyeArthritisRadiculopathyHypertension

Issues on Appeal

Service ConnectionReopenHearing Loss

Why It Was Decided This Way

Fontenot , through counsel,appeals a May 7, 2008,Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board)decision in which the Board denied his claims for entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss;chronic gastrointestinal disability, to include gastroesophageal reflux disorder (GERD); hypertension;a right shoulder disability, to include arthritis;and an eye disability manifested by diplopia.

Because the Board failed to explain why a medical nexus examination was not warranted for the gastrointestinal claim and the Secretary provided an inadequate examination for the hearing loss claim,the Court will vacate the Board's May 7,2008,decision and remand the matter for further proceedings consistent with this decision.

After he failed to submit a Notice of Disagreement, the RO informed the appellant that the rating decision of July 7,2000,became final,and he would have to submit new and material evidence to reopen his claims.

The RO again denied the appellant's claims, finding that no new and material evidence was offered for the hearing loss claim and evidence purportedly supporting his gastrointestinal claim was new but not directly relevant to the issue.

The RO continued its denial of the appellant's claims,finding that the additional evidence since its last decision was not new and material, such that his claims could be reopened.

On appeal,however,the Board found that the RO applied an incorrect evidentiary standard and had not procured some additional medical records identified by the appellant.

In a September 2006 Supplemental Statement of the Case,the RO again found new and material evidence was lacking and denied the appellant's claims.

The Board found that a VA medical nexus examination was not warranted for his gastrointestinal claim and implicitly found the 2005 C P audiological examination to be adequate.

Authorities Cited

Allday v. BrownArdison v. BrownBarr v. NicholsonBowling v. PrincipiCaluza v. BrownDaves v. NicholsonDyment v. WestFletcher v. DerwinskiGabrielson v. BrownGreen v. DerwinskiHare v. DerwinskiHickson v. WestHyatt v. NicholsonKutscherousky v. WestLendon v. NicholsonNolan v. GoberRodriguez v. PeakeRusso v. BrownSee Allday v. BrownSee Best v. PrincipiSee Caluza v. BrownSee Donnellan v. ShinsekiSee Ford v. GoberSee Frankel v. DerwinskiSee Kay v. PrincipiSee Maggitt v. WestSee Tucker v. WestSmith v. BrownStefl v. NicholsonStegall v. West

Denial Type

Credibility|No Nexus|Not New Material|Duty To Assist|Inadequate Exam

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 →