CAVC Case 22-7337: Knee
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · 2024-08-28 · PIETSCH, 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
Knee ConditionIncreased Rating
Why It Was Decided This Way
In an April 2016 decision,the Board denied a rating higher than 10%, effective before January 1,2011,for right knee degenerative arthritis,status post arthroscopic surgeries and unicompartmental arthroplasty.
The Board noted that because the March and April 2010 examiners did not provide estimated ROM during flare-ups,VA obtained retrospective medical opinions in November 2021 and August 2022.
But relying on the November 2021 and August 2022 opinions estimating ROM during flare -ups, the Board found a compensable rating unwarranted becausethe April 2010 measurement was taken during an acute episode of pain and was otherwise limited to only 5 degrees at worst .
The Board found that a change of DC was warranted before May 26,2010,and granted a 20%disability rating under DC 5258, effective from February 2,2010 (the date of claim)for painful motion with frequent episodesof pain,locking,and effusion resultingfrom a meniscal tear.
The Board found it was not factually ascertainable that the disability had worsened in the year before the veteran filed the claim,finding scant medical or lay evidence from this time and concluding that the veteran's January 2010 complaint of increased symptoms over the past few months was not specific.
The Board found that because testing was performed duringthe appeal period but did not demonstrate instability,a separate ratingunder DC 5257 was unwarranted.
Parties'Arguments The appellant argues that the Board erred in relying on the November 2021 and August 2022 VA examinations,asserting that the examinations were inadequate and did not substantially comply with the Board's August 2021 and April 2022 remand orders.
The appellant also argues that the Board failed to provide adequate reasons or bases for its findings on whether separate ratings were warranted under DCs 5261, 5257,and5055, including during the 1-year look back period.
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 →