CAVC Case 20-1455: Back
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · 2019-12-27 · SCHOELEN
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
Back ConditionService ConnectionReopen
Why It Was Decided This Way
In October 2003, the appellant requested that his disability compensation claim for the back be reopened based on new and material evidence.
He submitted a 2002 positive nexus opinion from a VA examiner, Dr.
In a July 2006 decision,the Board found that the appellant had submitted new and material evidence,R.
at 3454-55;but after further development, the RO and the Board denied the disability compensation claim because it found that the current disability was not related to service,R.
In March 2017,the Board relied on the December 2010 VA examiner's negative nexus opinion as the most probative and persuasive medical evidence and denied the claim.
But the Board found no evidence that a back injury was sustained at that time.
The Board also detailed the December 2010 VA examiner's negative nexus opinion and the June 2018 VA examiner's positive nexus opinion,including that the June 2018 VA examiner reviewed a note from Dr.
In its analysis,the Board explained that it found the December 2010 VA examiner's rationale for his negative nexus opinion was sufficient and probative and adequate in light of the [appellant]'s claims of the examiner's mischaracterization of his work history.
Authorities Cited
Denial Type
Credibility|No Nexus|Not New Material|Preponderance Against|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 →