BVA Case 18-6734: Depression

Real Board of Veterans' Appeals decision · December 3,2019 · SCHOELEN, Judge

Outcome
Affirmed
Decision Date
December 3,2019
Judge
SCHOELEN, Judge
Service Era
Not specified

Conditions Claimed

DepressionAnxietyPsychiatricBackCervicalKneeShoulderHipTbiHeart

Issues on Appeal

Back ConditionService ConnectionKnee Condition

Why It Was Decided This Way

In the decision here on appeal the Board denied service connection for each of the claimed conditions.

Applicable Law 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.

A factual 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.

To comply with this requirement,the Board must analyze the credibility and probative value of the evidence,account for the evidence that it finds to be persuasive or unpersuasive,and provide the reasons for its rejection of any material evidence favorable to the claimant.

The Secretary's duty to assist requires that he provide a VA medical examination to a claimant when there is (1) competent evidence of a current disability or persistent or recurrent symptoms of a disability;(2)evidence establishing that an event,injury, or disease occurred in service or,for certain diseases, manifestation of the disease during an applicable presumptive period for which the claimant qualifies;and (3)an indication that the disability or persistent or recurrent symptoms of the 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.

Depression The Board found that that there was no evidence of depression or any relevant symptoms during service or at separation.

at 269-74,279-81,292-96,the Board noted that there is no evidence of record that the appellant (to a medical provider) or a medical provider related the depression to his military service,R.

3d 1313 (requiring a nexus between a current disability and military service in order for service connection to be warranted); McLendon ,20 Vet.

Authorities Cited

Allday v. BrownBerger v. BrownCalma v. BrownCaluza v. BrownClain v. NicholsonDe Perez v. DerwinskiFrankel v. DerwinskiGilbert v. DerwinskiHersey v. DerwinskiHeuer v. BrownHickson v. WestHilkert v. WestLendon v. NicholsonRose v. WestSee Breeden v. PrincipiSee Davidson v. ShinsekiSee Frost v. ShulkinSee Pederson v. McWaters v. Shinseki

Denial Type

Credibility|No Nexus|Duty To Assist

Find Similar Precedent 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 →