CAVC Case 22-0968: Back
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · 2021-05-28 · BARTLEY, Chief 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
BackHearing LossShoulderHeadache
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
Back ConditionService Connection
Why It Was Decided This Way
The Board found the veteran not competent to provide a link between her current low back disability and her service, but did not address her March 2017 Notice of Disagreement reporting treatment for low back pain on active duty,R.
The Court also found that the Board failed to reconcile the appellant.
The appellant's migraine headaches,the Court found that the Board failed to provide adequate reasons or bases for selecting DC 8100 to evaluate her headaches by analogy.
In the January 2022 decision on appeal,the Board denied service connection for a low back disability,finding that the veteran first reported back pain in August 1997 following a work-related injury many years after service.
The Board noted that the veteran denied a history of recurrent back pain at the June 1985 air evacuation examination and April 1986 Reserve 3 examination and found that her lay statements as to continuity of back symptoms since service, particularly a May 2019 statement, 2 were inconsistent and therefore not credible.
The Board's determinations regarding service connection and the appropriate degree of disability are findings of fact subject to the clearly erroneous standard of review.
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.
To comply with this requirement, the Board must analyze the credibility and probative value of evidence,account for evidence that it finds persuasive or unpersuasive,and provide reasons for its rejection of material evidence favorable to the claimant.
Authorities Cited
Denial Type
Credibility|Inadequate Exam
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 →