CAVC Case 17-1483: PTSD
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · 2016-08-24 · ALLEN, 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
PTSDDepressionAnxietyPsychiatric
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 ConnectionPTSD
Why It Was Decided This Way
To comply with this requirement,the Board must analyze the credibility and probative value of the evidence,account for the evidence which it finds to be persuasive or unpersuasive,and provide the reasons for its rejection of any material evidence favorable to the veteran.
The Board's weighing of evidence is a question of fact that must be upheld unless clearly erroneous.
Appellant argues the Board erred in evaluating the evidence of record regarding the occurrence of the claimed in-service sexual assault,including its determination that (1)appellant's statements regarding the claimed in-service assault lack credibility ; (2)appellant's post-service medical evidence of record does not demonstrate [a]relationship between service and the current psychiatric disorders ;and (3)the probative value of two VA medical examinations in 2008 and 3 2011 heavily outweighed three positive medical opinions supporting appellant's service connection claim.
The Board's Credibility Determination With regard to appellant's credibility regarding the occurrence of the claimed in-service sexual assault,the Board found as follows: For one,[appellant's]report of sexual assault to the November 2009 social worker is inconsistent with the record and with other statements made to the VA.
However,the chronology of events in this case is very significant to a finding of credibility that the stressor occurred,or that [appellant]experienced a downturn in behavior due to the stressor.
The Board finds that the chronology as reported by [appellant]on numerous occasions,and to the November 2009 social worker,is inconsistent with the service records and [appellant's]credibility is called into question.
There are several reasons that the Board's statement concerning its conclusion about appellant's credibility is insufficient.
First,in assessing appellant's credibility,the Board failed to take into account the impact that the claimed in-service assault may have had on appellant's ability to recall and report that event consistently.
Authorities Cited
Denial Type
Credibility|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 →