BVA Case 13-395: Back
BVAReal Board of Veterans' Appeals decision · · PROST, Chief Judge
Conditions Claimed
BackHipRespiratoryEyeRadiculopathy
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 |
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
BackHipRespiratoryEyeRadiculopathy
Why It Was Decided This Way
Allen had shown that he had an in-service injury (“environmental exposure”) and a present disability (sinusitis), he failed to establish a nexus ALLEN v.
Baker could do more than speculate as to nexus or state that nexus was “possible.
Allen could not alternatively establish nexus by showing conti- nuity of symptomatology under 38 C.
It also found that the VA had fulfilled its duty to assist.
It concluded that the Board provided an adequate statement of reasons and bases to support its decision, did not err in finding that the benefit of the doubt rule was inapplicable, correctly found that the VA satisfied its duty to assist, and disa- greed with the remainder of Mr.
I To establish service connection for a present disabil- ity, a veteran must show that: (1) he suffers from a pre- sent disease or disability; (2) there was an in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) there is a causal link or nexus between the present disa- ALLEN v.
Allen had satisfied the first two requirements; thus, the issues on appeal focus on whether there is a nexus between Mr.
Allen argues that the Veterans Court and the Board erred in finding there was no nexus because the Board failed to liberally construe his “filings” and failed apply the “benefit of the doubt rule” according to 38 U.
Authorities Cited
Regulations Cited (38 CFR / 38 USC)
Denial Type
Credibility|No Nexus|Duty To Assist
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 →