CAVC Case 11-1074: Back
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · 2011-01-14 · BARTLEY, 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
BackCervicalShoulderAnkleHeadacheHeartRespiratoryArthritisRadiculopathy
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 ConnectionReopen
Why It Was Decided This Way
Based upon these facts,and a discharge examination revealing no pulmonary abnormalities ,the physician concluded that the veteran had mild asbestosis but that it was more likely than not related to his exposure outside his period of service.
The RO,in a March 2005 rating decision, granted an increased evaluation of 30%for tension headaches but determined that new and material evidence had not been presented to warrant reopening the previously denied claims for service connection.
The appellant's claim for a higher evaluation for headaches but found that new and material evidence had been offered to reopen service connection for numbness of the fingers,and that the new-and-material-evidence standard had been wrongly applied to the claims for service connection for degenerative joint disease of the lumbar spine and asbestosis,because SMRs were available at the time of the RO's October 2002 decision but not associated with the claims file until later.
2 With respect to numbness of the fingers,the Board noted specifically as follows: The Board additionally notes that a claim of service connection for a neck disability has been referred to the RO.
5 currently diagnosed respiratory disease is at least as likely as not related to in-service asbestos exposure,as opposed to post-service occupational exposure.
With regard to finger numbness,the examiner concluded that it was related to his carpal tunnel disorder and related carpal tunnel surgeries and was not related to service.
The Secretary responds that the Board's decision denying service connection was supported by an adequate statement of reasons or bases, and that its factual findings are supported by the record and not clearly erroneous.
Establishing service connection generally requires medical or,in certain circumstances,lay evidence of (1)a current disability,(2)an in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury, and (3)a nexus between the claimed in-service disease or injury and the present disability.
Authorities Cited
Denial Type
Credibility|No Nexus|Not New Material|Preponderance Against|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 →