CAVC Case 21-4580: PTSD
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · 2021-02-11 · 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
PTSDDepressionAnxietyPsychiatricCervical
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
3 Because the September 2019 and September 2020 VA medical opinions on which the Board relied are inadequate,and because the Board failed to provide an adequate statement of reasons or bases for its findings on appellant's credibility,the Court will set aside the Board's decision and remand the matter for further proceedings.
[8] Finally,the examiner noted that a lack of objective evidence prevented her from accurately determining the presence of any psychiatric disorder without undue speculation,and that appellant's medical records clearly do not reveal a DSM-5 diagnosis or a nexus between major depression,a neurocognitive disorder,and service.
10 It found that additional commentary was necessary to adequately explain whether there was a nexus between major depression,a neurocognitive disorder,and service.
11 It requested an explanation why there was no evidence of a nexus between major depression,neurocognitive disorder,and service, and 4 R.
14 With respect to major depressive disorder,the examiner opined that appellant did not endorse depression on discharge,that his record documents negative depression screens until 2017 when he endorsed depressive symptoms related to a 2008 neck injury; thus, a nexus .
16 She also opined that a lack of continuous complaints or evidence of cognitive impairment during and after service indicated a nexus could not plausibly be established.
18 In the decision on appeal,the Board found appellant competent to report his current symptoms but not competent to diagnose his mental health conditions or relate them to service.
Appellant's Argument About Credibility As factfinder,the Board is responsible for assessing and weighing the evidence,including making credibility determinations.
Authorities Cited
Denial Type
Non Denial Outcome
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 →