Case 23010056: Back
DecisionVeterans-appeals decision document (court public records) · February 16, 2023 · Unknown
Conditions Claimed
BackHearing LossTinnitusHipHeadacheEye
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 |
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
BackHearing LossTinnitusHipHeadacheEye
Why It Was Decided This Way
In December of 2019, the Board denied, in relevant part, entitlement to service connection for Meniere's disease.
In this case, the Board concludes that the competent, probative evidence of record is not indicative of a nexus between the Veteran's Meniere's Disease and his active duty service.
In regard to a nexus, several medical opinions are of record, all of which were provided by medical professionals who are presumed to have the training and expertise to opine on the etiology of Meniere's disease.
When evaluating the evidence of record, the Board must assess the credibility and probative value of the evidence, and, provided that it offers an adequate statement of reasons or bases, the Board may favor one medical opinion over another.
However, it was agreed upon in the JMPR that this examination was inadequate because this examiner did not address whether the Veteran's Meniere's disease was related to his in-service noise exposure.
Therefore, it is less likely than not that the veteran's M�ni�re's had its nexus in service or is due to noise exposure during service.
The paternalistic nature of VA law envisions VA giving every benefit of the doubt to a potential VA claimant and it would be both unfathomable and unconscionable for VA to obligate VA-affiliated examiners to be, "paid to say no to veterans".
109 (1996) (recognizing that nurses' statements regarding nexus were sufficient to make a claim well grounded); Williams, 4 Vet.
Authorities Cited
Regulations Cited (38 CFR / 38 USC)
Denial Type
Credibility|No Nexus|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 →