CAVC Case 13-1457: Cervical
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · 2013-03-19 · 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
Service ConnectionReopen
Why It Was Decided This Way
In a February 2003 rating decision,the RO explained that service connection for a bilateral shoulder condition had been denied in March 1995 and that the appellant had not submitted new and material evidence sufficient to reopen the claim.
The appellant related that he has continued to have 3 shoulder pain since service and submitted a medical nexus opinion from his VA treating physician who stated that the appellant's bilateral shoulder disorder is more likely as not related to service.
In April 2009,the Board denied the appellant's claims for a bilateral shoulder disorder.
Noting that the appellant filed a claim immediately after his discharge and that the May 2005 VA examiner related the appellant's left shoulder disability to his complaints in February 1995, the Board found the appellant's reports of continuity of symptomatology credible.
Although the evidence showed that the appellant has a current right shoulder disability,the Board found that the preponderance of the evidence was against a finding that there is a nexus between his current disability and an in-service event or injury.
The Parties'Arguments The appellant generally contends that the Board's decision is not supported by an adequate statement of reasons or bases because the Board denied his claim for a right shoulder disability based upon the same historical record relied on by the Board to grant his claim for a left shoulder disability.
The appellant also asserts that the Board erred when it discounted his 5 VA treating physician's favorable nexus opinion based on an alleged lack of documentation.
Rather,he asserts,the Board found the appellant not competent to render an etiology opinion and that the most persuasive evidence of record failed to relate his current right shoulder disability to service.
Authorities Cited
Denial Type
Credibility|No Nexus|Not New Material|Preponderance Against
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 →