CAVC Case 15-1477: PTSD
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · 2015-03-19 · 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
PTSDAnxietyPsychiatricSkinRespiratoryArthritis
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 ConnectionEffective DateIncreased RatingPTSD
Why It Was Decided This Way
Decision on Appeal In the March 2015 decision on appeal,the Board determined that the appellant.
Regarding the skin disorder,the Board found there was no evidence of a current condition.
Regarding the right-hand arthritis and carpal tunnel syndrome, the Board concluded that the evidence of record weighed against entitlement to service connection.
Skin Disorder Claim The appellant first argues that the Board erred in not providing him with a medical examination in conjunction with his claim for service connection for a skin disorder.
In disability compensation claims,the duty to assist includes providing the claimant with a VA medical examination or opinion when there is (1)competent evidence of a current disability or persistent or recurrent symptoms of a disability,and (2) evidence establishing that an event,injury, 4 or disease occurred in service or establishing certain diseases manifesting during an applicable presumptive period for which the claimant qualifies,and (3)an indication that the disability or persistent or recurrent symptoms of a disability may be associated with the veteran's service or with another service-connected disability,but (4)insufficient competent medical evidence on file for the Secretary to make a decision on the claim.
This determination is reviewed by the Court under the clearly erroneous standard of review.
A finding of material fact is clearly erroneous when the Court,after reviewing the entire evidence, is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.
This is a classic factual assessment,involving the weighing of facts,and the Board's findings are subject to the 'clearly erroneous'standard of review.
Authorities Cited
Denial Type
Credibility|No Nexus|Duty To Assist|Inadequate Exam
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 →