CAVC Case 11-782: PTSD
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · 2011-03-02 · 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
PTSDPsychiatricKneeAnkleRespiratoryArthritis
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 ConnectionReopenIncreased RatingPTSD
Why It Was Decided This Way
The Secretary asserts that the Board's decision should be vacated and the matter remanded because the Board failed to provided an adequate statement of reasons or bases for its decision.
3 The Board found that the appellant's asthma was 'noted' at the time the appellant entered military service,stating that the appellant's March 1968 pre-induction examination report documented that the claimant was an asthmatic albeit not verified.
Moreover,the Board failed to address relevant precedent when it relied on the appellant's pre- induction examination report to find that the appellant's condition was noted at entry.
The Board cited the appellant's pre- induction examination,but failed to consider that the appellant's clinical evaluation did not show any abnormalities of his lungs or state that he had asthma at the time of induction.
In addition,although the Board acknowledged that the appellant's reported history of asthma had not 4 been verified,the Board did not address what significance,if any,to assign to the fact that the examining physician failed to record this history under the section SUMMARY OF DEFECTS AND DIAGNOSIS.
In the decision on appeal,the Board determined that the appellant's claim for a compensable disability rating had been pending from September 1992 (R.
In rendering its decision, the Board noted that examiners recorded no pertinent abnormal clinical findings regarding the left fifth metatarsal disability, and that the [v]eteran's only complaints were of recurrent left foot pain and swelling.
Analysis The parties agree that a remand is required because the Board failed to address the relevance of 38 C.
Authorities Cited
Denial Type
Credibility|No Nexus|Preponderance Against|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 →