CAVC Case 24-7144: PTSD
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · 2026-01-15 · 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
PTSDHeadacheRespiratoryEyeArthritis
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 ConnectionIncreased RatingPTSD
Why It Was Decided This Way
He underwent an examination the following month;the VA examiner diagnosed moderate-to-severe triscaphe joint osteoarthritis,but she opined that the condition was less likely than not related to left hand pain experienced during service and was instead at least as likely as not caused by increasing age.
Regarding his left hand condition,the appellant noted that he filed a claim for arthritis in 1993,referenced his 1993 diagnosis of mild periarticular demineralization in the left hand and wrist,and suggested that the August 2023 nexus opinion was inadequate because the examiner failed to acknowledge that diagnosis.
Parties'Arguments The appellant first argues that the Board erred by rating his disability from migraine variants under 4.
The Board's determination of the proper disability rating is a finding of fact that the Court reviews under the clearly erroneous standard of review.
A finding of fact is clearly erroneous when the Court,after reviewing the entire evidence, is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.
As with any material issue of fact or law,the Board must provide a statement of reasons or bases that is adequate to enable a claimant to understand the precise basis for the Board's decision,as well as to facilitate review in this Court.
Board Decision As an initial matter,the Board noted that this appeal stems from the April 2023 higher-level review decision and that the Board may consider only the evidence of record at the time of the July 6 Case:24-7144 Page: 7 of 13 Filed:01/15/2026 2022 rating decision.
The Board noted,however, that DC 9412 governs panic disorders and/or agoraphobia and that the appellant's PTSD was already rated under the General Rating Formula for Mental Disorders.
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 →