CAVC Case 17-0035: Knee
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · 2016-11-25 · MEREDITH, 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
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 ConnectionKnee Condition
Why It Was Decided This Way
The examiner diagnosed the appellant with GERD with a date of diagnosis of 1989,concluding that such disability is less likely than not related to a specific exposure event .
The examiner diagnosed the appellant with degenerative joint disease of the knees with a diagnosis date of the 1980s,opining that the appellant's mild degenerative joint disease of the left knee is at least as likely as not related to service because service treatment records reflected an in-service,left knee injury,abnormal x-ray changes,and swelling in the left knee,and that such knee injuries can result in maladaptive stress on the knee,which when compounded by vigorous physical activity over an extended period,can result in degenerative changes.
On November 25, 2016,the Board denied disability compensation for right knee degenerative joint disease,status post meniscectomy,and for hiatal hernia and GERD.
ANALYSIS The appellant argues that the Board erred by relying upon inadequate VA examinations in denying his disability compensation claims for hiatal hernia and GERD and for a right knee 4 disability.
Whether a medical [examination or]opinion is adequate is a finding of fact,which the Court reviews under the 'clearly erroneous'standard.
A finding of 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.
As with any material issue of fact or law,the Board must provide a statement of the reasons or bases for its determination adequate to enable a claimant to understand the precise basis for the Board's decision,as well as to facilitate review in this Court.
With respect to the VA examinations provided to the appellant,the Board found: The [appellant]was also provided with VA examinations which,collectively, contain a description of the history of the disabilities at issue;document and consider the relevant medical facts and principles; and provide opinions regarding the etiology of the [appellant's]claimed conditions.
Authorities Cited
Denial Type
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 →