CAVC Case 09-1567: Back
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · 2009-02-28 · MOORMAN, 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
BackKneeHearing LossTinnitusHipHeadacheRespiratoryArthritisHypertension
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
Back ConditionService ConnectionIncreased RatingHearing LossHip Condition
Why It Was Decided This Way
The Court concludes that the Board erred in referring, rather than remanding or adjudicating the dental claim.
4 identified the dental claim and made a specific allegation of error�that the dental work done in service was never completed and, therefore,implicitly alleged that the RO failed to address his contention.
As conceded by the Secretary, the Board failed to discuss whether the appellant's hypertension 6 could be secondary to or aggravated by his service-connected sinusitis,including as secondary to the medication he takes for his sinusitis.
As to the appellant's claim for an increased rating for sinusitis,the Board erred because it failed to explain why it applied Diagnostic Code 6514,sphenoid sinusitis (R.
In addition,the Board erred in providing an inadequate statement of reasons or bases in denying a 30%rating for the appellant's service-connected sinus condition.
The Secretary's duty to assist includes,in appropriate cases,the duty to conduct a thorough and contemporaneous medical examination.
The Board's determination of whether the Secretary has fulfilled his duty to assist generally is a finding of fact that the Court reviews under the clearly erroneous standard of review.
at 52 (when applying the clearly erroneous standard,if,after reviewing the record in its entirety,the Court finds that the Board's finding of fact is supported by a plausible basis, 'the [Court]may not reverse it even though convinced that had it been sitting as trier of fact,it would have weighed the evidence differently.
Authorities Cited
Denial Type
No Nexus|Not Service Connected|Preponderance Against|Duty To Assist|Inadequate Exam
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 →