CAVC Case 11-2345: Back
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · 2011-04-28 · 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
BackCervicalShoulderHipAnkleHeadacheRespiratoryArthritisRadiculopathy
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
On October 2,1980,the Board denied the appellant's headache claim.
Direct Service Connection Establishing service connection generally requires medical or,in certain circumstances,lay evidence of (1)a current disability;(2)incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury in service; and (3)a nexus between the claimed in-service injury or disease and the current disability.
It is well established that the Board must provide a statement of the reasons or bases for its determination,adequate to enable an appellant to understand the precise basis for its decision,as well as to facilitate review in this Court.
It is the Board's responsibility,as factfinder,to determine the credibility and weight to be given to the evidence.
The determination of the credibility of lay evidence is a factual question reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard.
While the Board may discount favorable evidence if it finds the evidence lacks probative value,the Board must provide an adequate statement of reasons or bases for its rejection of any material evidence favorable to the claimant.
The Board also noted the appellant's assertions that he experienced headaches as a result of alleged in-service injuries, but the Board concluded that there is no evidence in the [appellant's] contemporaneous [SMRs]that he incurred any injuries other than a broken ankle during active service .
Although these records tend to corroborate the appellant's assertions that he injured more than his ankle during the fall,and that some of his headaches occurred after the helicopter accident,the Board found that this evidence was not probative because the complaints were not recorded at the time of the December 1970 helicopter accident and the examiner made no medical findings regarding these complaints.
Authorities Cited
Denial Type
Credibility|No Nexus|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 →