CAVC Case 90-476: Anxiety
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · February 6, 1992 · NEBEKER, Chief 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
AnxietyBackKneeAnkleEyeArthritisRadiculopathy
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
AnxietyBackKneeAnkleEyeArthritisRadiculopathy
Why It Was Decided This Way
On April 26, 1960, the VA Regional Office (VARO) rating board denied service connection for psychoneurosis mixed type and rupture of nucleus pulposis with nerve root compression L-4, L- 5.
First, the BVA must determine whether the evidence is `new and material'.
Second, if the BVA determines that the claimant has produced new and material evidence, the case is reopened and the BVA must evaluate the 5 merits of the veteran's claim in light of all the evidence, both new and old.
The claimant bears the initial burden of presenting "new and material" evidence under 38 U.
In such a case, as presented here, where "the BVA determines that evidence is `new and material', reopens and reconsiders the claim, and once again denies the claim, that decision is subject to review on appeal by this Court based upon the entire record because the decision of the BVA was required to be based upon all evidence and material of record.
The 1990 BVA decision focused on "whether the evidence received is new and material and of such weight as to establish a new factual basis in support of an allowance of benefits.
While the VARO found the recent evidence new and material when it reopened appellant's claim, the BVA concluded "that the additional evidence received subsequent to the Board's prior decisions does not establish entitlement to the benefits claimed.
Just as in the Manio case, the February 14, 1990, BVA decision "reveals that the BVA erroneously failed to consider the evidence submitted by appellant in the course of prior appeals.
Authorities Cited
Regulations Cited (38 CFR / 38 USC)
Denial Type
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 →