CAVC Case 10-3268: PTSD
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · 2010-06-10 · DAVIS , 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
PTSDDepressionAnxietyPsychiatricEye
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
First,he contends that the Board failed to comply with the requirements of Bernard v.
Specifically,he argues that the Board made negative credibility determinations as to his lay statements concerning the occurrence of his alleged stressor when the regional office (RO)had made no such credibility determinations,and further failed to provide an analysis whether he would be prejudiced by the Board's consideration of these credibility matters.
Second,he argues that VA failed to fulfill its duty to assist under 38 U.
Finally,he argues that the Board failed to provide a sufficient statement of reasons or bases with regard to each of the foregoing matters.
Continuity of symptomatology may establish service connection if a claimant can demonstrate that (1)a condition was noted during service;(2)there is postservice evidence of the same symptomatology;and (3)there is medical or,in certain circumstances,lay evidence of a nexus between the present disability and the postservice symptomatology.
In the decision here on appeal the Board found that [t]he Veteran has been variously diagnosed as having depressive and anxiety disorders which have been clinically linked to an alleged in-service personal assault.
This case thus turns on the sufficiency of the Board's explanation of its negative credibility findings.
Compliance With Bernard The appellant argues that the RO had never previously addressed his personal credibility,and therefore,the Board's decision to address it,without prior notification, was against this Court's holding in Bernard .
Authorities Cited
Denial Type
Credibility|No Nexus|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 →