CAVC Case 18-0323: PTSD

CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · 2017-09-21 · 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.

What would this rating pay you? (2026 rates)

Official 2026 VA monthly compensation, including the 2.8% COLA increase.

per month ·  per year, tax-free

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)
RatingMonthly (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
See your full claim picture — free
Outcome
Vacated / Remanded
Decision Date
2017-09-21
Judge
MEREDITH, Judge
Service Era
Not specified

Conditions Claimed

PTSDDepressionAnxietyPsychiatricKneeShoulderAnkle

Sponsored
Missing the medical evidence for your VA claim? REE Medical connects veterans with independent licensed providers for nexus letters and DBQs — $50 off through this link.

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 ConditionPTSD

Why It Was Decided This Way

The Board determined that a VA examination to evaluate the etiology of the right ankle disability and an addendum medical opinion as to whether there is clear and unmistakable evidence that [a preexisting]right shoulder disability was not aggravated during service were necessary.

Further, the Board concluded that the available VA PTSD examinations were inadequate and thus a new VA examination was warranted.

since January 2012,to include depression and generalized anxiety disorder ; discuss whether a prior depression diagnosis was proper and currently asymptomatic,or a misdiagnosis ;and for each diagnosed disability,even if currently asymptomatic,provide a nexus opinion,and in doing so, reference the [appellant's]statements as to onset [and]the April 1992 [r]eport of [m]edical [h]istory on which the [appellant]reported frequent trouble sleeping.

The examiner opined that the current right ankle condition is caused by tendonitis,which is more likely than not related to aging and occupational stressors.

The examiner provided the following rationale:There is no evidence of a chronic right ankle condition in service or shortly following service;the right ankle condition is less likely than not related to his in-service plantar fasciitis because plantar fasciitis typically does not involve [the]ankle and there is no evidence relating the conditions;the right ankle condition is less likely than not related to his service-connected right knee disability because there is no evidence that the knee injury directly affects the ankle; and in-service environmental hazards and chronic multisystem illnesses did not cause the current condition because it is an [i]solated single joint problem that is typical of strains/tendonitis over the lateral ankle region.

He maintained that this does not change the conclusion or rationale in his July 2015 opinion,and explained that the appellant's current shoulder disabilities are from the rotator cuff region of the shoulder and NOT the clavicle and that they are more likely than not related to aging and occupational stresses[,]which is proven by diagnosis in recent years[,]as opposed to shortly following [discharge from service].

ANALYSIS With regard to his right shoulder,the appellant argues that the Board erred when it found the presumption of soundness had been rebutted.

The Secretary concedes that the Board failed to provide an adequate statement of reasons or bases for relying on the 2016 VA PTSD examination to deny the PTSD claim,but argues that the Court should affirm the remaining portions of the Board's decision.

Authorities Cited

Allday v. BrownArdison v. BrownAries v. PeakeBarr v. NicholsonBest v. PrincipiDyment v. PrincipiEvans v. WestFletcher v. DerwinskiGilbert v. DerwinskiGilbert v. ShinsekiGill v. McHorn v. ShinsekiKutscherousky v. WestMiller v. WestMonzingo v. ShinsekiQuirin v. ShinsekiSee Deloach v. ShinsekiSee Dyment v. WestSee Frankel v. DerwinskiSee Gill v. ShinsekiSee Hensley v. WestSee Kay v. PrincipiSee Tucker v. WestStefl v. NicholsonStegall v. WestVan Valkenburg v. ShinsekiWagner v. Principi

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 →
Sponsored
Missing the medical evidence for your VA claim? REE Medical connects veterans with independent licensed providers for nexus letters and DBQs — $50 off through this link.

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.

VetAid is a free veterans claims tool, not a VA-accredited representative — it does not file anything with VA for you, and it works alongside your accredited VSO, claims agent or attorney. About VetAid