BVA Case 14-0783: Back

Real Board of Veterans' Appeals decision · April 23,2015 · MOORMAN, Judge

Outcome
Affirmed
Decision Date
April 23,2015
Judge
MOORMAN, Judge
Service Era
Not specified

Conditions Claimed

BackKneeHearing_LossTinnitusArthritis

Issues on Appeal

Service ConnectionKnee ConditionHearing Loss

Why It Was Decided This Way

The examiner's rationale concludes: Thus there is no nexus or medical evidence of chronic left knee pain that was continuous after the veteran left the service.

In the November 2013 decision here on appeal,the Board denied the claim.

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.

sen while he was in service,and the appellant asserts the Board neglected to ensure that VA met its duty to assist by adequately considering his right knee disorder and by failing to obtain medical records.

Second,he states the Board erred by failing to provide [him]with a medical examination for his right knee condition.

Finally,he asserts the Board erred by failing to explain and apply the heightened duty to assist standard in this case, regarding certain VA medical records that the appellant alleges exist but were not found by VA.

Each of these asserted errors arise under the Secretary's duty to assist,which this Court reviews under a clearly erroneous standard of review.

The substantiation or rejection of a service-connection claim is a finding of fact and also reviewed under a clearly erroneous standard of review pursuant to 38 U.

Authorities Cited

Allday v. BrownAnderson v. CityArdison v. BrownAries v. PeakeButts v. BrownCaluza v. BrownDavidson v. ShinsekiDoran v. BrownGilbert v. DerwinskiGreen v. DerwinskiHersey v. DerwinskiHeuer v. BrownHicks v. BrownHickson v. WestHorn v. ShinsekiLendon v. NicholsonLoving v. NicholsonRobinson v. ShinsekiRodriguez v. PeakeSee Acevedo v. ShinsekiSee Dyment v. WestSee Falzone v. BrownSee Frankel v. DerwinskiSee Nolen v. GoberSee Robinson v. PeakeSee Shinseki v. SandersSee Stegall v. WestSee Swann v. BrownSee Wood v. DerwinskiSimon v. Derwinski

Denial Type

Credibility|No Nexus|Not Service Connected|Duty To Assist|Inadequate Exam

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 →