CAVC Case 24-2807: PTSD
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · 2025-09-09 · 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
PTSD
Why It Was Decided This Way
In December 2021,the Board determined that the October 2021 VA examination report was inadequate and that another examination .
VA obtained,in April 2022,a medical opinion regarding the appellant's exposure to contaminated water at Camp Lejeune ;the VA clinician opined that the appellant's neurocognitive disorders are not related to such exposure.
In December 2022,the Board denied disability compensation for a TBI.
In the September 2023 JMR,the parties agreed that the Board (1)provided inadequate reasons or bases for its decision because the Board failed to consider the combat presumption found in 38 U.
ate,(4)the Board provided inadequate reasons or bases for finding the appellant not credible,(5)the Board failed to address VA medical records indicating that the appellant's TBI was caused by a helicopter crash during service,(6)the Board erred by relying on examination reports it had already determined were inadequate without explaining which parts it was relying on,and (7)the Board erred by reversing its implicit credibility finding made in the December 2021 remand,without notifying the appellant that his credibility was at issue and affording him an opportunity to respond.
4 Case:24-2807 Page: 5 of 10 Filed:09/09/2025 In February 2024,the Board denied disability compensation for a TBI.
The appellant essentially agrees that the Board erred when it listed his former fiduciary in the caption of the decision, but he disagrees as to how the caption should be revised.
Parties'Arguments The appellant first argues that the Court should reverse (1)the Board's finding that it substantially complied with the December 2021 remand and thus complied with the September 2023 JMR and (2)the Board's implicit finding that the duty to assist was satisfied because VA did not conduct record searches to corroborate his combat service and helicopter crash, VA failed to obtain a medical opinion addressing whether the TBI was caused by exposure to explosions,and the VA examination reports are inadequate given that they do not account for his lay statements.
Authorities Cited
Denial Type
Credibility|No Nexus|Duty To Assist|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 →