CAVC Case 12-0444: Back
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · 2011-12-21 · 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
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 ConnectionIncreased Rating
Why It Was Decided This Way
In the other decision,the Board denied entitlement to disability compensation for back and left leg disabilities,finding that the appellant's back condition is not related to service nor a result of his service-connected ankle disability and that he does not currently have a left leg disability.
Duty To Assist �Records For Ankle and Penile Condyloma Claims The Secretary has a duty to assist claimants in developing their claims.
The Secretary's duty to assist includes making reasonable efforts to obtain all potentially relevant records that the appellant adequately identifies and authorizes the Secretary to obtain.
The Board's determination that VA has satisfied the duty to assist is reviewed under the 'clearly erroneous'standard of review.
A finding is clearly erroneous when,although there is evidence to support it,the reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.
As always,the Board must provide a statement of reasons or bases for its determination,adequate to enable an appellant to understand the precise basis for the Board's decision as well as to facilitate review in this Court.
To comply with this requirement,the Board must analyze the credibility and probative value of the evidence,account for the evidence it finds persuasive or unpersuasive,and provide for its rejection of any material evidence favorable to the claimant.
The appellant argues that the Board provided an inadequate statement of reasons or bases for its finding that VA fulfilled its duty to assist in obtaining identified medical records.
Authorities Cited
Denial Type
Credibility|No Nexus|Duty To Assist|Inadequate Exam|No Current Disability
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 →