BVA Case 22-2326: Back

Real Board of Veterans' Appeals decision · August 21,2023 · PIETSCH, Judge

Outcome
Vacated / Remanded
Decision Date
August 21,2023
Judge
PIETSCH, Judge
Service Era
Not specified

Conditions Claimed

BackKneeShoulderHipTdiuArthritisRadiculopathy

Issues on Appeal

Service ConnectionEffective DateTdiuIncreased RatingHip Condition

Why It Was Decided This Way

The examiner opined that his right shoulder disability was not related to service or his service-connected left shoulder disability.

In May 2014,another VA examiner opined against nexus because [t]here is no medical literature to support the contention that a fracture metatarsal or a shoulder separation would aggravate any .

Approximately two years later,the Board denied service connection for a left and right hip disorder and right shoulder condition.

The appellant subsequently appealed that denial to this Court and the claims were again remanded after he and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs agreed that neither the July 2011 nor May 2014 VA medical nexus opinions adequately informed the Board on the issue of aggravation.

Additional opinions were obtained in August 2017,but the Board found those to be similarly inadequate and subsequently ordered additional nexus opinions on both causation and aggravation.

In June 2019,VA obtained another set of nexus opinions that opined against nexus for the claimed hip condition because the Veteran has no diagnosed right hip condition.

The examiner also opined against nexus for his right shoulder condition,asserting that it was most likely caused by normal aging and the Veteran's generalized debilitated state from his stroke residuals and confinement to [a] wheelchair.

VA obtained additional medical opinions that opined against nexus in October 2020.

Authorities Cited

Allday v. BrownAmin v. ShinsekiArdison v. BrownAries v. PeakeBarr v. NicholsonCaluza v. BrownDavis v. WestFletcher v. DerwinskiGilbert v. DerwinskiGreen v. DerwinskiHersey v. DerwinskiKutscherousky v. WestNolen v. GoberPederson v. McRobinson v. ShinsekiRodriguez v. PeakeSee Best v. PrincipiSee Colvin v. DerwinskiSee Frankel v. DerwinskiSee Kay v. PrincipiSee Martin v. Occupational Safety Health Review CommSee Medrano v. NicholsonSee Pederson v. McSee Robinson v. PeakeSee Ward v. WilkieStefl v. NicholsonTadlock v. McWard v. Wilkie

Denial Type

Credibility|No Nexus|Duty To Assist|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 →