CAVC Case 91-1074: Back
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · April 23, 1993 · 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
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
BackSkinEye
Why It Was Decided This Way
Readjudication Based on New and Material Evidence Pursuant to 38 U.
§ 5108 (West 1991), the Secretary must reopen a previously and finally disallowed claim when "new and material evidence" is presented or secured with respect to that claim.
First, it must determine whether the evidence presented or secured since the prior final disallowance of the claim is "new and material".
If the evidence is new and material, the Board must then review the new evidence "in the context of" the old to determine whether the prior disposition of the claim should be altered.
In determining whether evidence is new and material, "the credibility of the evidence must be presumed.
The determination whether evidence is "new and material" is a conclusion of law which the Court reviews de novo under 38 U.
The BVA decision is ambiguous as to whether the Board denied the claim on the basis that there was no new and material evidence to reopen or whether it reopened the claim and denied benefits based on review of all the evidence.
For the reasons stated below, the Court holds that there was new and material evidence requiring the Board to reopen and readjudicate the claim.
Authorities Cited
Regulations Cited (38 CFR / 38 USC)
Denial Type
Credibility|Not New Material|Preponderance Against
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 →