CAVC Case 96-208: GI
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · February 1, 1999 · 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
GIEye
Why It Was Decided This Way
The Board determined that the veteran's death was not connected to his exposure to radiation during military service.
While the Board noted that the veteran was exposed to radiation in service and subsequently developed a condition related to radiation exposure, it concluded, on the basis of Dr.
For a claim to be well grounded, generally, there must be: (1) a medical diagnosis 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 in-service injury or disease and the current disability.
The appellant argues that the Board erred because the Director of Compensation and Pension did not specifically address all of the factors listed in 38 C.
Duty to Assist Once a claimant has submitted a well-grounded claim, the Secretary is required to assist that claimant in developing the facts pertinent to that claim.
Even assuming the appellant's claim is well grounded and thus triggered the duty to assist, the Secretary did not violate his duty.
The Secretary's duty to assist does not encompass "a duty to prove a claim with the claimant only in a passive role.
Competence of Expert Witness Finally, the appellant asserts that the Board failed to qualify Dr.
Authorities Cited
Regulations Cited (38 CFR / 38 USC)
Denial Type
Credibility|No Nexus|Not Service Connected|Preponderance Against|Duty To Assist
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 →