CAVC Case 23-2108: Psychiatric
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · 2023-02-24 · 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
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 matter returned to the Board, but in August 2022,the Board determined that another remand was warranted for the RO to attempt to obtain outstanding treatment records.
On February 24,2023, the Board denied entitlement to disability compensation for a lumbar spine disability.
He asserts that the Board previously found those reports credible,but the Board failed to provide him with advanced notice and an opportunity to respond before reversing course.
Next,the appellant contends that the Board provided inadequate reasons or bases for impugning his credibility and relied on its own unsubstantiated medical opinion in doing so.
Further,he avers,had the Board found him credible,it may have found the June and October 2022 VA examiners' opinions inadequate because both examiners failed to support their opinions with an adequate rationale,erroneously based their opinions on the lack of corroborating treatment records,and failed to account for his full medical history,specifically his lay report of pain in service and continuous pain since service.
The Secretary counters that the Board did not make a final assessment of the appellant's credibility in the October 2021 remand or implicitly find the appellant's reports incredible in the 4 decision on appeal.
In his reply brief,the appellant asserts that the Secretary conflates the Board's weighing of the evidence as it relates to nexus with the Board's finding of no in-service incurrence,which was based in part on the Board finding the appellant's report of in-service back pain not credible.
He contends that had the Board found him credible in his assertions that he experienced back pain during service,the Board would have had to find that the second element of service connection � an in-service injury � had been met.
Authorities Cited
Denial Type
Credibility|No Nexus|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 →