CAVC Case 10-2595: Back
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · 2010-07-23 · 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
BackHipAnkleSkinArthritisRadiculopathy
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 Connection
Why It Was Decided This Way
In October 2009,the appellant was provided a VA medical examination to analyze whether there is a nexus between his current disabilities and his service.
The Board's Decision In its July 23,2010, decision here on appeal,the Board denied the appellant's claims for entitlement to service connection for dermatological disabilities to include skin cancer,residuals of a left hip fracture with arthritis,a left leg disability,and a low back disability with arthritis.
Regarding the appellant's skin cancer claim,the Board found that cancer is a radiogenic disease,but that the evidence does not show that the appellant was exposed to radiation during his service.
Regarding the appellant's left hip and left leg claims,the Board found that the appellant's testimony about his in-service injury is credible and concluded that the appellant did sustain an in- service injury to his left hip.
The Board determined,however,that the evidence fails to demonstrate that the appellant's post-service leg and hip disorders are related to his in-service injury.
Finally,regarding the appellant's back disorder,the Board found that there is no evidence of an in-service injury to the appellant's spine.
The Board found that the findings of the October 2009 VA medical examiner,along with a lack of complaint of a back disorder until 2005, reveal that the appellant did not suffer a back injury in service.
First,regarding his skin disorder claim,the appellant argues that the Board failed to ensure that VA properly executed a regulation mandating that he be provided a radiation dose estimate based on his claimed exposure to ionizing radiation in service and his subsequent diagnosis with a radiogenic disorder.
Authorities Cited
Denial Type
Credibility|No Nexus|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 →