CAVC Case 24-2039: PTSD

CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · 2025-05-07 · GREENBERG, 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.

What would this rating pay you? (2026 rates)

Official 2026 VA monthly compensation, including the 2.8% COLA increase.

per month ·  per year, tax-free

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)
RatingMonthly (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
See your full claim picture — free
Outcome
Unknown
Decision Date
2025-05-07
Judge
GREENBERG, Judge
Service Era
Not specified

Conditions Claimed

PTSDDepressionAnxietyPsychiatricDiabetesTDIUErectile DysfunctionProstate

Sponsored
Missing the medical evidence for your VA claim? REE Medical connects veterans with independent licensed providers for nexus letters and DBQs — $50 off through this link.

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 ConnectionEffective DateTDIUIncreased RatingPTSD

Why It Was Decided This Way

The Secretary concedes the Board erred in denying a TDIU.

at 5-15,the Board found that the appellant's PTSD with depressive disorder was manifested by occupational and social impairment with reduced reliability and productivity from May 29,2018,and before that date,the disorder was manifested by occupational and social impairment with occasional decrease in work efficiency and intermittent periods of inability to perform occupational tasks.

The Board found that the medical records showed that from May 29,2018,the appellant was alert and oriented,with good grooming 6 Case:24-2039 Page: 7 of 14 Filed:05/07/2025 and hygiene,intact and organized thoughts,and normal speech, and without suicidal or homicidal ideations,delusions,paranoia,or psychotic symptoms.

The Board conceded that the appellant reported occurrences of irritation,frustration,isolation (outside of his family and girlfriend),and nightmares, but the Board found that the appellant reported increased mental health benefits from interacting with his granddaughters.

The Board also acknowledged that the appellant was more depressed after his prostate surgery,but the Board found that his walking routine and search for meaningful activities helped decrease the depression.

The Board found that the appellant reported that he was pursuing multiple hobbies.

The Board noted that the June 2018 examiner noted moderate PTSD symptoms,including nightmares, intrusive thoughts of combat,irritability,hypervigilance, depressed mood,anxiety, chronic sleep impairment, difficulty establishing and maintaining relationships,and suicidal ideation, causing occupational and social impairment with reduced reliability and productivity.

The Board determined that the appellant's PTSD with depressive disorder manifested in symptoms more closely approximating a 50%rating;though the Board acknowledged the appellant's history of suicidal thoughts, the Board found that the records contain a low frequency and low level of severity of suicidal ideations.

Authorities Cited

Andrews v. McBowling v. PrincipiCantrell v. ShulkinCarroll v. McClaudio v. ShinsekiConroy v. AniskoffEvans v. WestFletcher v. DerwinskiFrankel v. DerwinskiGilbert v. DerwinskiGolden v. ShulkinHanson v. BrownHedgepeth v. WilkieHenderson v. ShinsekiIn Ray v. WilkieLisio v. ShinsekiMarbury v. MadisonMauerhan v. PrincipiRusso v. BrownSee Allday v. BrownSee Bankhead v. ShulkinSee Caluza v. BrownSee Dunn v. WestSee Kutscherousky v. WestSee Tucker v. WestSee Yick Wo v. HopkinsSwain v. McVan Hoose v. BrownWarren v. McWithers v. Wilkie

Denial Type

Non Denial Outcome

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 →
Sponsored
Missing the medical evidence for your VA claim? REE Medical connects veterans with independent licensed providers for nexus letters and DBQs — $50 off through this link.

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.

VetAid is a free veterans claims tool, not a VA-accredited representative — it does not file anything with VA for you, and it works alongside your accredited VSO, claims agent or attorney. About VetAid