CAVC Case 23-2641: Skin
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · 2024-07-02 · 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
Service Connection
Why It Was Decided This Way
Therefore, [his] skin condition is at least as likely as not related to his military service.
In August 2018,the Board remanded the appellant's claims,finding that although the January 2014 VA examiner had provided positive nexus opinions,those opinions were based 1 Tinea versicolor is a common,chronic,usually symptomless infection of the stratum corneum of the skin .
With respect to the appellant's skin condition,the Board noted that the examiner indicated that the appellant had sought treatment in service and was misdiagnosed then with tinea versicolor,but the Board found that there is no evidence the [appellant] sought treatment during service for skin symptoms such as a rash, [t]he separation examination also showed a normal skin examination,except for 'PFB,' which is a medical abbreviation for pseudofolliculitis barbae, and [t]here is no service treatment record indicating the [appellant]was diagnosed with tinea versicolor.
at 547-90,but the Board in July 2020 found that the examiner failed to provide adequate rationale for his negative nexus opinions,R.
In March 2022,the Board found the pes planus opinion inadequate because the physician impermissibly relied on the absence of medical evidence,failed to address the appellant's lay statements,and recorded the aggravation opinion under the direct service connection portion of the examination report.
There is no nexus [to]service, including as due to sun or heat exposure,or the other exposures specified above.
Appellant Regarding pes planus,the appellant argues that the Board erred by failing to provide an adequate statement of reasons or bases for rejecting [the]favorable January 2014 VA medical opinion in apparently concluding that his condition had not worsened in service.
He contends that the Board failed to explain why corroborating [service medical records]were necessary to support the VA examiner's opinion and why [his own]lay reports to the examiner did not suffice to support the opinion.
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 →