CAVC Case 22-5983: Depression
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · 2022-09-13 · 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
DepressionAnxietyPsychiatricCervicalHeadacheArthritisRadiculopathy
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 ConditionIncreased Rating
Why It Was Decided This Way
Parties'Arguments The appellant contends that the Board failed to provide an adequate statement of reasons or bases because the Board did not sufficiently consider the January 2016 private medical record showing that he had decreased cervical spine range of motion and because the Board relied on its own medical opinion to find that his range of motion did not satisfy the criteria for a higher rating.
The Board's determination of the proper disability rating is a finding of fact that 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.
As for the private medical records, the Board found that the appellant had reported a moderate degree of sharp pain with stiffness and soreness in the upper right side of his back and neck, and in January 2016,his ranges of motion[]were decreased with moderate pain.
The Board noted that a 10%rating is warranted when the limitation of motion of the specific joint .
In assessing whether a rating higher than 10%was appropriate,the Board determined that there was no evidence .
The Board acknowledged the appellant's statements that he has functional loss due to stiffness and cramping, but the Board found that the degree of additional limitation would not result in limitation of motion more nearly approximating the rating criteria for a 20% rating.
Authorities Cited
Denial Type
Credibility|Inadequate Exam|Rating Criteria
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 →