CAVC Case 11-2546: PTSD
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · 2011-07-06 · 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
PTSDDepressionAnxietyPsychiatric
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
Because the Board failed to provide an adequate statement of reasons or bases,the Board's decision will be vacated and the matter remanded for further adjudication.
The Board found that a January 2006 Veterans Claims Assistance Act (VCAA) notice letter did not advise the appellant that evidence of behavior changes may constitute credible supporting evidence of the sexual assault ;therefore,it ordered the RO to inform and ask the appellant to provide or identify any evidence from sources other than his service records that might corroborate his claimed stressor.
The Board found that the October 2009 letter provided the appellant with notice of the evidence needed to substantiate his claim as required by 38 C.
Additionally,the Board found that an examination was not warranted based on its findings that the appellant's reports 5 of the in-service assault were not credible so there was no evidence of a nexus between the appellant's PTSD diagnosis and service.
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 stessor, with credible supporting evidence that the claimed in-service stressor occurred; and (3)evidence of causal nexus between the current symptomatology and the in-service stressor.
The Board's findings concerning combat status and the sufficiency of corroborating 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.
304(f)(5) The appellant argues that the Board erred by not remanding his case for failure to provide the notice required by 38 C.
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 →