BVA Case 12-0238: Depression

Real Board of Veterans' Appeals decision · April 15,2013 · PIETSCH, Judge

Outcome
Vacated / Remanded
Decision Date
April 15,2013
Judge
PIETSCH, Judge
Service Era
Not specified

Conditions Claimed

DepressionAnxietyPsychiatricBackHeartGiTdiu

Issues on Appeal

Service ConnectionTdiu

Why It Was Decided This Way

PIETSCH, Judge :The appellant, Francisco Ortiz ,appeals through counsel a December 19, 2011,Board of Veterans'Appeals (Board)decision in which the Board denied him entitlement to an initial disability rating greater than 10%for irritable bowel syndrome and denied him entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU).

The Board determined that the March 2010 VA medical examiner had not described the average daily frequency of the appellant's irritable bowel syndrome symptoms and had not provide[d]other equivalent information which would address the rating criteria for evaluating the severity of the disability.

The Board thus concluded that the March 2010 VA medical examination was inadequate because it failed to address the criteria upon which the [appellant's irritable bowel syndrome]is rated,and failed to provide information as to whether there were any changes in severity during the pendency of the appeal.

The Board found,therefore,that a new medical examination should be ordered.

The examiner opined that the appellant's current complaints of diarrhea [are] at least as likely as not related to his history of irritable bowel syndrome.

Regarding irritable bowel syndrome,the Board determined that the appellant experiences watery stools three times per day, but does not suffer from constipation,abdominal pain,or swelling.

Thus,the Board concluded,the appellant's disorder is not of the severity required for an increased disability rating.

Regarding TDIU,the Board determined that the appellant's service-connected disabilities, when considered in isolation from other factors,do not preclude [him]from securing or following a substantially gainful occupation.

Authorities Cited

Allday v. BrownBeaty v. BrownCaluza v. BrownColayong v. WestColvin v. DerwinskiDela Cruz v. PrincipiDuenas v. PrincipiFletcher v. DerwinskiFrankel v. DerwinskiGilbert v. DerwinskiGleicher v. DerwinskiGreen v. DerwinskiHatlestad v. DerwinskiHensley v. WestHersey v. DerwinskiIn Friscia v. BrownKahana v. ShinsekiKutscherousky v. WestLendon v. NicholsonMittleider v. WestMoore v. NicholsonPratt v. DerwinskiRice v. ShinsekiRoberson v. PrincipiSchafrath v. DerwinskiSee Best v. PrincipiSee Bowling v. PrincipiSee Gutierrez v. PrincipiSee Harris v. DerwinskiSee Kay v. Principi

Denial Type

Credibility|Duty To Assist|Inadequate Exam|Rating Criteria

Find Similar Precedent 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 →