CAVC Case 94-589: Back
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · September 4, 1996 · FARLEY
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
BackGIEye
Why It Was Decided This Way
FARLEY, Judge: This is an appeal from a July 8, 1994, Board of Veterans' Appeals (BVA or Board) decision which determined that new and material evidence sufficient to reopen a claim for service connection for a duodenal ulcer had not been submitted.
In January 1955, a medical board found that the appellant was unfit for duty, and that the ulcer condition preexisted service and was not aggravated by service.
The RO responded by informing the appellant that he needed to submit new and material evidence and by sending him an appeal form.
In November 1992, the hearing officer found that the appellant had not submitted new and material evidence.
In July 1994, the BVA found that the appellant had not submitted new and material evidence.
The Board found that the SMRs were considered by the RO prior to its 1955 decision, stating that 5 a document dated March 14, 1955, contained in the envelope with the service medical records notes that medical records had been transferred to the RO prior to the April 1955 rating decision.
Therefore, the Board must find that the service medical records were considered by the RO in the April 1955 rating decision, and the photocopies of service medical records submitted as additional evidence are not new and material.
Crane's statements did not address when the ulcer developed, and so were not material.
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 →