CAVC Case 22-0257: Back
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · 2021-11-26 · MEREDITH, 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
BackCervicalHearing LossTinnitusShoulderDiabetesArthritisRadiculopathyErectile DysfunctionHypertension
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
SMCBack ConditionService ConnectionReopenHearing Loss
Why It Was Decided This Way
On November 26,2021,the Board found that new and relevant evidence had not been submitted to warrant readjudication of the claims for disability compensation for tinnitus and erectile dysfunction,and the Board denied entitlement to disability compensation for bilateral upper extremity peripheral neuropathy,kidney disease, hematuria,vertigo,and chronic cerumen buildup of the left ear.
Law Establishing that a disability is service connected for purposes of entitlement to VA disability compensation generally requires medical or,in certain circumstances,lay evidence of (1)a current disability,(2)incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury in service,and (3)a nexus between the claimed in-service injury or disease and the current disability.
Additionally,under certain circumstances,and as part of its duty to assist claimants,VA must provide a medical examination.
23,2017),VA no longer reopens prior claims based on new and material evidence ;rather,VA will readjudicate a claim if new and relevant evidence is presented or secured with respect to a supplemental claim.
The Board's determinations of whether new and relevant evidence has been submitted, whether the record establishes entitlement to service connection,and whether a medical examination is adequate are findings of fact,which the Court reviews under the clearly erroneous standard of review.
A finding of fact is clearly erroneous when the Court,after reviewing the entire evidence, is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.
As with any material issue of fact or law, the Board must provide a statement of reasons or bases that is adequate to enable a claimant to understand the precise basis for the Board's decision,as well as to facilitate review in this Court.
In that regard,he avers that the Board failed to explain why the June 2017 examiner could not rely on the appellant's description of his symptoms to reach the medical conclusion that the appellant had diabetic peripheral neuropathy.
Authorities Cited
Denial Type
No Nexus|Not New Material|Preponderance Against|Duty To Assist
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 →