CAVC Case 09-4670: PTSD
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · 2009-11-05 · SCHOELEN, 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 ConnectionEffective DateReopenPTSD
Why It Was Decided This Way
The appellant ,appeals through counsel a November 5,2009,Board of Veterans'Appeals (Board)decision that found new and material evidence had been received to reopen a claim for entitlement to service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD),but denied the claim on the merits.
The Board determined that new and material evidence had been received to reopen a claim of entitlement to service connection for PTSD,but denied the claim on the merits.
The Board concluded that [t]he [v]eteran did not serve in combat and the record does not include credible evidence corroborating the occurrence of the [v]eteran's claimed in-service stressors including a personal assault.
The appellant argues that VA did not fulfill its duty to assist because,notwithstanding his statements that he engaged in combat with the enemy and the presence of a diagnosis of PTSD based,in part,on his reported combat experiences,VA failed to conduct a search for unit histories or morning reports,which could corroborate his assertion that he engaged in combat.
The appellant also argues that the Board failed to provide an adequate statement of reasons or bases for finding that he did not engage in combat and impermissibly ignored favorable evidence demonstrating that his PTSD diagnosis had been attributed to combat.
ANALYSIS To establish service connection for PTSD,a claimant must present (1)evidence of a current diagnosis of PTSD;(2)evidence of an in-service stressor,with credible supporting evidence that the claimed in-service stressor occurred; and (3)evidence of a causal nexus between the current symptomatology and the in-service stressor.
The Board's findings concerning combat status and the sufficiency of corroborative evidence are findings of fact that the Court reviews under the clearly erroneous standard of review.
A finding of fact is clearly erroneous when the Court,after reviewing the entire evidence, is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.
Authorities Cited
Denial Type
Credibility|No Nexus|Not New Material|Duty To Assist
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 →