CAVC Case 90-178: Depression

CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · November 12, 1991 · MANKIN

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
Affirmed / Vacated
Decision Date
November 12, 1991
Judge
MANKIN
Service Era
Not specified

Conditions Claimed

DepressionAnxietyPsychiatricBackCervicalEye

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

DepressionAnxietyPsychiatricBackCervicalEye

Why It Was Decided This Way

The rating board denied service connection for a nervous condition because there was no evidence of 3 treatment for a nervous condition in service.

The rating board found that the evidence was new but not material since it did not tend to support the conclusion that appellant's current condition was incurred in or that it was aggravated while he was in service or that it had manifested itself within one year after appellant was discharged.

A rating decision issued on December 18, 1986, determined that appellant had not offered any new and material evidence.

The rating board determined that the reports were "cumulative in nature, and only confirm[ed] the presence of a nervous condition, and that "they [did] not establish a new factual basis warranting reconsideration of s[ervice] c[onnection] for the nervous condition.

90-239, at 4 (May 23, 1988) (in affirming the BVA's denial to reopen the claim, the Court found that the BVA committed error when the Board treated evidence submitted by appellant as new and material when it concluded that the evidence was cumulative).

The rating board determined on June 9, 1987, that the records did constitute new, but not material evidence sufficient to reopen the claim because "they merely relate[d] to treatment 13 to 14 years after service.

The hearing officer determined that the evidence presented at appellant's personal hearing was not new and material.

II Analysis The VA Regional Office determined that the medical records from the Connecticut Department of Correction, which were not before the hearing examiner, were new and material.

Authorities Cited

Akles v. DerwinskiColvin v. DerwinskiGilbert v. DerwinskiGodwin v. DerwinskiJones v. DerwinskiKarnas v. DerwinskiManio v. DerwinskiMoore v. DerwinskiPayne v. DerwinskiPeyton v. DerwinskiSammarco v. DerwinskiSee Jones v. DerwinskiSee Thompson v. DerwinskiSmith v. Derwinski

Regulations Cited (38 CFR / 38 USC)

38 CFR 3.102 (1990)38 CFR 3.303(a) (1991)38 CFR 3.30638 CFR 3.30738 CFR 3.307(a)(3)38 CFR 3.307(a)(3) (1990)38 CFR 3.307(c)38 CFR 3.307(c) (1990)38 CFR 3.307(c) (1991)38 CFR 4.127 (1990)38 USC 1112(a)(1)38 USC 170238 USC 31238 USC 5107(b)38 USC 510838 USC 7104(a)38 USC 7104(d)(1)38 USC 7104(d)(4)38 USC 725238 USC 7261(b)

Denial Type

Credibility|Not New Material

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 →
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.