BVA Case 23-4815: Back

Real Board of Veterans' Appeals decision · October 15,2024 · MEREDITH, Judge

Outcome
Vacated / Remanded
Decision Date
October 15,2024
Judge
MEREDITH, Judge
Service Era
January 1966 to February 1974

Conditions Claimed

BackCervicalShoulder

Issues on Appeal

Service Connection

Why It Was Decided This Way

He underwent a VA examination in November 2015 1 ;the examiner diagnosed bilateral shoulder strains and opined that the conditions are not related to service.

Regarding nexus,the examiner acknowledged the appellant's contention that he began having shoulder pain in 1981, but the examiner determined that the conditions were not likely related to service because it was not corroborated by the records.

The Board, in August 2022,found the November 2015 VA examiner's opinion to be inadequate,noting that the examiner had primarily relied on the absence of medical records in forming her negative nexus opinion,and the Board remanded the shoulder claims to obtain a new medical opinion.

The appellant underwent a second VA examination in November 2022;the examiner diagnosed bilateral shoulder strains and opined that the conditions are not related to service.

In explaining her negative nexus opinion,the examiner noted in part that there was no evidence of chronicity during service or after service, as would be expected if parachute jumps or physical training had caused a chronic shoulder disability.

The following month,the Board found that remand was required because the November 2022 opinion was inadequate,noting that the examiner had relied primarily on the absence of contemporaneous medical records to render a negative nexus opinion and that such an opinion is inadequate for adjudicative purposes.

In April 2023,the Board denied disability compensation for left and right shoulder conditions.

Specifically,he avers that the clinician primarily based her negative nexus opinion on the lack of contemporaneous medical records,even though the Board instructed that such reliance is improper.

Authorities Cited

Allday v. BrownArdison v. BrownBarr v. NicholsonDyment v. PrincipiEuzebio v. McEvans v. ShinsekiEvans v. WestFletcher v. DerwinskiGilbert v. DerwinskiGill v. McHampton v. GoberKutscherousky v. WestMonzingo v. ShinsekiSee Breeden v. PrincipiSee Deloach v. ShinsekiSee Dyment v. WestSee Frankel v. DerwinskiSee Gill v. ShinsekiSee Hensley v. WestSee Kay v. PrincipiSee Martin v. Occupational Safety Health RevSee Quirin v. ShinsekiSee Tucker v. WestStefl v. NicholsonStegall v. WestVan Valkenburg v. Shinseki

Denial Type

No Nexus|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 →