CAVC Case 14-0635: PTSD
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · 2014-01-02 · PIETSCH, 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
PTSDBackKneeShoulderHeartArthritis
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 ConnectionReopenKnee ConditionPTSD
Why It Was Decided This Way
He contends that VA failed to satisfy its duty to assist him by gathering relevant documents and providing an adequate medical nexus opinion.
McAllister had refused to give him a medical nexus opinion,but that he could probably obtain those treatment records.
In April 2013,the Board determined that the appellant's testimony regarding his in-service duties and his continuity of symptomotology was new and material evidence sufficient to reopen the claim.
In August 2013,VA provided the appellant with a second medical examination and nexus opinion.
As an initial matter,the Board found that VA had complied with its duty to assist the appellant and that the April 2013 VA medical opinion was adequate for rating purposes.
The Board also considered service connection based on the appellant's report that his knee symptoms were continuous since service, but found that the appellant's statements in that regard lacked credibility due to,inter alia,inconsistency with other evidence of record.
Finally, the Board determined that the evidence was insufficient to directly establish that the appellant's knee conditions were related to service,relying primarily on the August 2013 VA medical opinion.
ANALYSIS Establishing service connection generally requires medical or,in certain circumstances,lay evidence of (1)a current disability;(2)an in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3)a nexus between the claimed in-service disease or injury and the present disability.
Authorities Cited
Denial Type
Credibility|No Nexus|Not New Material|Preponderance Against|Duty To Assist
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 →