BVA Case 21-5184: Ptsd

Real Board of Veterans' Appeals decision · August 22,2022 · MEREDITH, Judge

Outcome
Affirmed
Decision Date
August 22,2022
Judge
MEREDITH, Judge
Service Era
Not specified

Conditions Claimed

PtsdPsychiatricBackSleep_ApneaHipTbiGiRadiculopathy

Issues on Appeal

Back ConditionService ConnectionPtsdSleep ApneaHip Condition

Why It Was Decided This Way

In July 2011,the appellant underwent a VA peripheral nerves examination;the examiner diagnosed lumbar degenerative disc disease with right lower extremity sciatica and opined that the conditions were not related to service.

Additionally,the Board found that a remand of the remaining claims was required because corroboration of the in-service MST and a decision regarding entitlement to compensation for an acquired psychiatric disorder could affect the TBI, lumbar spine,and left hip disability claims � purported to result from the in-service MST � as well as the sleep disorder and gastrointestinal disability claims � alleged to be secondary to the other disabilities.

On June 2,2021,the Board denied entitlement to disability compensation for a TBI, a lumbar spine disability,a left hip disability,sleep apnea,and a gastrointestinal disability.

1, November 2015,and April 2016 VA examinations relied on by the Board were inadequate and that the Board failed to provide sufficient reasons or bases for its reliance on those examination reports.

Specifically,as to the TBI,she argues that the Board failed to explain why it discounted her lay statements showing a nexus between the in-service MST and the onset of her cognitive impairments despite finding those statements competent and credible.

However,she also contends that the Board misunderstood her statements when it discounted them because they attempted to prove nexus.

And she avers that the Board failed to explain why it did not consider alternate theories of entitlement,namely, dementia secondary to a TBI or MST.

Regarding the sleep apnea claim,she contends that the Board failed to explain why it did not obtain a medical examination and why that claim is not inextricably intertwined with the remanded psychiatric disorder claim,particularly given the Board's previous determination that the two issues were intertwined.

Authorities Cited

Allday v. BrownBerger v. BrownCarr v. SaulCoker v. PeakeDavidson v. ShinsekiGilbert v. DerwinskiHampton v. GoberHilkert v. WestLendon v. NicholsonLocklear v. NicholsonMaggitt v. WestMorris v. McRobinson v. PeakeRobinson v. ShinsekiScott v. McSee Breeden v. PrincipiSee Coker v. NicholsonSee Dickens v. McSee Frankel v. DerwinskiSee Russo v. BrownShedden v. PrincipiShinseki v. SandersSickles v. Shinseki

Denial Type

Credibility|No Nexus|Inadequate Exam

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 →