BVA Case 21-1308: Back

Real Board of Veterans' Appeals decision · September 16,2022 · PIETSCH, Judge

Outcome
Affirmed
Decision Date
September 16,2022
Judge
PIETSCH, Judge
Service Era
Not specified

Conditions Claimed

BackKneeRespiratoryTdiuEyeRadiculopathy

Issues on Appeal

Back ConditionService ConnectionKnee ConditionTdiu

Why It Was Decided This Way

Thomas , appeals a November 12,2020,Board of Veterans'Appeals (Board)decision in which the Board denied (1)service connection for a lumbar spine disorder;(2)service connection for a right knee disorder;(3)service connection for bilateral lower extremity nerve damage;and (4)entitlement to a total disability rating for compensation based on individual unemployability (TDIU).

In a November 2018 decision,the Board denied the claims for service connection for a lumbar spine disorder,a right 5 knee disorder,and nerve damage of the legs,as well as for a TDIU.

The Court also held that remand is required for the Board to attempt to secure these records or to explain why these records could not be retrieved.

The Court also held that the Board did not discuss whether VA had complied with the heightened duty to assist when it came to retrieving the appellant's service treatment records.

In addition,the Court remanded the claim for the Board to determine the credibility of the appellant's his spouse's,and his friends'lay statements.

In the November 2020 decision we consider here on appeal,the Board denied entitlement to service connection for a lumbar spine disorder,a right knee disorder,bilateral lower extremity nerve damage,and a TDIU.

PARTIES'ARGUMENTS The appellant contends that on remand, the Board mischaracterized the Court's holding as addressing only the Board's duty to explain its heightened duty to assist when discussing service treatment records.

Lumbar Spine Disability The Board must provide a written statement of its reasons or bases for findings and conclusions on all material issues of fact and law presented on the record.

Authorities Cited

Allday v. BrownAnderson v. CityBuchanan v. NicholsonButts v. BrownCoker v. NicholsonCoker v. PeakeDavidson v. ShinsekiEvans v. WestFountain v. McGabrielson v. BrownGilbert v. DerwinskiGodfrey v. BrownHickson v. ShinsekiJandreau v. NicholsonKahana v. ShinsekiLayno v. BrownMadden v. GobberNorman v. McSee Caluza v. BrownSee Dyment v. WestSee Frankel v. DerwinskiSee Hersey v. DerwinskiSee Kays v. SnyderSee Locklear v. NicholsonSee Madden v. GoberSee Reonal v. BrownShinseki v. SandersSoyini v. DerwinskiStegall v. WestTaylor v. Mc

Denial Type

Credibility|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 →