BVA Case 96-536: Back
Real Board of Veterans' Appeals decision · April 12, 1999 · FARLEY
Conditions Claimed
BackHearing_LossTinnitusShoulderTdiuEye
Why It Was Decided This Way
On June 9, 1989, the Board denied service connection for Meniere's disease.
On January 28, 1993, the RO confirmed the 20% rating for left- shoulder disability; denied service connection for Meniere's disease because there was no evidence of service incurrence or nexus; and assigned a 0% rating for Meniere's disease and a 10% rating for labyrinthine hydrops, allergic in nature, for pension purposes but denied entitlement to pension benefits because the veteran's combined rating was only 30%.
In the April 17, 1996, BVA decision here on appeal, the Board found that there was no "new and material evidence" to reopen the veteran's claim for service connection for Meniere's disease and denied entitlement to a permanent and total disability rating for pension purposes.
Although the appellant in his brief claimed that the Board erred in not applying a continuity-of-symptomatology analysis under 38 C.
at 12), the Secretary failed to address that issue in his motion (see March 2, 1998, Motion (Mot.
Claim to Reopen Under the applicable law, the Secretary must reopen a previously and finally disallowed claim when "new and material evidence" is presented or secured.
The first step involves a determination as to whether the evidence 5 presented or secured since the last final disallowance of the claim is new and material.
If the BVA determines that the evidence is new and material, the Board must then reopen the claim and determine "whether the appellant's claim, as then reopened, is well grounded in terms of all the evidence in support of the claim, generally presuming the credibility of that evidence".
Authorities Cited
Regulations Cited (38 CFR / 38 USC)
Denial Type
Credibility|No Nexus|Not New Material|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 →