BVA Case 23-2883: Back

Real Board of Veterans' Appeals decision · June 28,2024 · JAQUITH, Judge

Outcome
Vacated / Remanded
Decision Date
June 28,2024
Judge
JAQUITH, Judge
Service Era
Not specified

Conditions Claimed

BackCervicalKneeHipHeartArthritisRadiculopathy

Issues on Appeal

Back ConditionService ConnectionReopenKnee Condition

Why It Was Decided This Way

The Court remands the claim for service connection for a low back disability because,as the Secretary concedes,the Board erred by relying on inadequate VA opinions.

A VA regional office (RO) denied service connection for a back condition based on a lack of new and material evidence, and also denied service connection for a right knee condition, a left knee condition,and radiculopathy of the right and left lower extremities.

As a result of this factual inaccuracy,the Board found this opinion to be inadequate in April 2022.

Case:23-2883 Page: 5 of 13 Filed:06/28/2024 issues in appellate status were whether new and material evidence had been received to reopen a previously denied claim of service connection for a back disability and his claims for service connection for a right knee disability,a left knee disability,and left and right lower extremity sciatic neuropathy.

Regardingthe back claim,the Board noted that VA had already conceded that the in-service fall froma Caterpillar D7 and resultinglow back injury occurred.

3 The Board concluded that the radiculopathy claims were inextricably intertwined with the .

Because the May 2022 VA opinions did not consider the evidence specified in the April 2022 Board remand,the case was sent back for clarification.

In the January 30,2023,decision on appeal, the Board denied service connection for a low back disability,bilateral lower extremity radiculopathy,and right and left knee disabilities.

Authorities Cited

Acevedo v. ShinsekiAllday v. BrownArdison v. BrownArline v. McBarr v. NicholsonBuchanan v. NicholsonFletcher v. DerwinskiFountain v. McGardin v. ShinsekiGilbert v. DerwinskiHarris v. CaseHenderson v. WestHorn v. ShinsekiMahl v. PrincipiMiller v. WilkieSee Kay v. PrincipiSee Shedden v. PrincipiSee Tucker v. WestSmith v. GoberStefl v. NicholsonTyrues v. Shinseki

Denial Type

Credibility|No Nexus|Not New Material|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 →