CAVC Case 96-1726: Back
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · 1996-12-04 · STEINBERG, 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
BackHipHeartArthritisHypertension
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
Service ConnectionHip Condition
Why It Was Decided This Way
In the BVA decision here on appeal, the Board denied his claims on the basis that his claims for hypertension and muscular atrophy were not well grounded and denied service connection for arthritis of the right hip and varicose veins (R.
To be well grounded, a service-connection claim generally requires (1) medical evidence of a current disability; (2) medical or, in certain circumstances, lay evidence of in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) medical evidence of a nexus between the claimed in-service disease or injury and the present disease or injury.
303(b) (1997) by (a) evidence that a condition was noted during service or during an applicable presumption period; (b) evidence showing postservice continuity of symptomatology; and (c) medical or, in certain circumstances, lay evidence of a nexus between the present disability and the postservice symptomatology.
For purposes of determining whether a claim is well grounded, the credibility of the evidence in support of the claim is presumed.
, current disability and medical nexus) ; rather, section 1154(b) relates only to incurrence -- that is, what happened in service.
3d 50 (1997) (table) (assuming court in Collette intended to supplement Caluza 's medical-nexus analysis, rather than obviate it, and reaffirming that Caluza analysis); see also Wade v.
302, 305 (1998) ( we hold again today, that a combat veteran who has successfully established the in-service occurrence or aggravation of an injury pursuant to [section] 1154(b) and Collette , must still submit sufficient evidence of a causal nexus between that in-service event and his or her current disability[,] as required by Caluza ); Velez , 11 Vet.
Because section 1154(b) does not obviate the other two Caluza requirements, a combat veteran who uses lay testimony to show incurrence must nevertheless use medical evidence to establish a nexus to service when the issue is one of medical etiology because lay persons are not competent to offer medical opinions .
Authorities Cited
Denial Type
Credibility|No Nexus|Not Service Connected|Duty To Assist
Find Similar Decisions 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 →