CAVC Case 21-5726: Hearing Loss
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · 2021-06-01 · LAURER, 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
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 ConnectionHearing Loss
Why It Was Decided This Way
1 Appellant asks the Court to reverse the Board�s finding that VA satisfied its duty to assist.
Legal Landscape VA has a duty to assist veterans in developing their claims.
5 VA must provide a medical exam when there is (1)competent evidence of a current disability or recurrent or persistent symptoms of a disability,(2)evidence that an event,injury,or disease occurred in service,(3)an indication that the current disability (or persistent or recurrent symptoms of a disability)may be associated with the veteran�s service ,and (4)insufficient medical evidence to decide the claim.
6 The Board must provide reasons and bases explaining its decision to refuse to provide an exam, 7 and the Court reviews that decision under the � arbitrary,capricious,abuse of discretion or otherwise not in accordance with law � standard.
�� 13 The Court us es the �clearly erroneous�standard to review the Board�s determinations about whether VA satisfied the duty to assist.
91,94 (1992)(�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.
�� 2 The Board,as factfinder,weighs the evidence � including the probative value of medical evidence and the credibility of lay evidence � in the first instance.
15 To assess credibility,the Board can consider self-interest, 16 missing contemporaneous evidence,conflicting statements, bias,and the passage of time since service.
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 →