CAVC Case 14-2557: Back
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · 2014-05-15 · 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
BackCervicalShoulderTDIUArthritis
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 ConnectionTDIUIncreased Rating
Why It Was Decided This Way
With respect to his cervical spine disability,he contends that the Board misapplied the benefit of the doubt doctrine, mischaracterized the evidence,and erred in making an adverse credibility finding regarding continuity of symptomatology following service.
With respect to the shoulder,the Board noted that diagnostic code (DC)5203,for dislocation of the clavicle or scapula, provides for a maximum 20%disability rating.
With respect to the cervical spine,the Board found that the preponderance of the evidence was against a finding that the appellant's neck condition was related to service,relying primarily on the negative VA medical nexus opinion.
Before the Court,the appellant contends that the Board erred in denying service connection for his neck condition because it mischaracterized the evidence and erroneously required medical evidence of a nexus to service.
The Board's determination of whether a medical opinion is adequate is a finding of fact that the Court reviews under the clearly erroneous standard.
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.
Service Connection for Cervical Spine Disability 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.
The Board must provide a statement of the reasons or bases for its determination,adequate to enable an appellant to understand the precise basis for its decision,as well as to facilitate review in this Court.
Authorities Cited
Denial Type
Credibility|No Nexus|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 →