CAVC Case 92-483: Back

CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · February 10, 1994 · KRAMER

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
Vacated / Remanded
Decision Date
February 10, 1994
Judge
KRAMER
Service Era
Not specified

Conditions Claimed

BackTDIUEyeRadiculopathy

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

BackTDIUEyeRadiculopathy

Why It Was Decided This Way

The appellant claims the Board erred in determining that a 1986 grant of service connection was clearly and unmistakably erroneous.

While we do not agree that the Board's finding that there was clear and unmistakable error in the prior grant of service connection was arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law, we do find that the Board breached its duty to assist the appellant.

Consequently, the Court vacates the decision of the Board, and remands this case so that the Board may have the opportunity to fulfill its duty to assist.

Thus, the Board concluded that the RO's October 1986 grant of service connection was clearly and unmistakably erroneous.

Furthermore, the RO failed to indicate whether it made any credibility determinations regarding the appellant's claims.

The Secretary asserts that the October 1986 grant of service connection was clearly erroneous.

Duty to Assist Once an appellant has presented a well-grounded claim, the Secretary has a duty to assist the veteran in "developing the facts pertinent to the claim.

The duty to assist includes the duty to seek to obtain VA records, as well as records from private physicians.

Authorities Cited

Baughman v. DerwinskiFugo v. BrownGodwin v. DerwinskiMurphy v. DerwinskiOppenheimer v. DerwinskiPorter v. BrownRogozinski v. DerwinskiRussell v. PrincipiSee Karnas v. DerwinskiSee Marlow v. BrownSee Russell v. PrincipiStanton v. BrownThurber v. BrownWhite v. Derwinski

Regulations Cited (38 CFR / 38 USC)

38 CFR 3.105(a)38 CFR 3.105(d)38 CFR 3.105(d) (1993)38 CFR 3.957 (1993)38 USC 5107(a)38 USC 7252(b)38 USC 7261(a)(3)

Denial Type

Credibility|Duty To Assist|Cue

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.