CAVC Case 97-1054: Depression

CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · August 19, 1998 · 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.

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
Reversed
Decision Date
August 19, 1998
Judge
NEBEKER, Chief Judge
Service Era
Not specified

Conditions Claimed

DepressionPsychiatricBackHeadache

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

DepressionPsychiatricBackHeadache

Why It Was Decided This Way

In the April 8, 1997, BVA decision here on appeal, the Board denied as not well grounded the veteran's claim on the ground of an absence of evidence of a nexus between the veteran's in-service treatment of symptoms of depression and paranoia, diagnosed as inadequate personality, and his current acquired psychiatric disorder.

A well-grounded 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 asserted in-service injury or disease and a current disability.

The credibility of evidence in support of the claim is generally presumed in determining whether a claim is well grounded.

In the present case, the Court holds, upon de novo review and presuming the credibility of the evidence submitted by the veteran, that the veteran has submitted a well-grounded claim.

Finally, as to the question of a nexus between his current condition and service, see Epps, Caluza, and Grottveit, all supra, the November 1992 private 4 medical examination report contains an Axis IV assessment of, inter alia, "Military Life".

Consequently, this record provides competent evidence, assuming its credibility, see Robinette and King, both supra, of a possible or plausible connection between the veteran's current condition and the in-service incurrence that he had experienced, and the Court thus holds that the veteran has submitted a well-grounded claim.

513, 516 (1996) (stating that medical evidence as to nexus to service expressed as "could" suffices for requirement of well-grounded claim); Watai v.

441, 443 (1996) (holding that medical evidence as to nexus to service expressed as "very well might have been", although not "conclusive", suffices to well ground claim); Robinette, 8 Vet.

Authorities Cited

Allday v. BrownBrammer v. DerwinskiCarpenter v. BrownEpps v. GoberGrottveit v. BrownHeuer v. BrownJustus v. PrincipiKing v. BrownLathan v. BrownMolloy v. BrownMurphy v. DerwinskiQuarles v. DerwinskiRabideau v. DerwinskiSee Alemany v. BrownSee Caluza v. BrownSee Grivois v. BrownSee Robinette v. BrownShore v. BrownTirpak v. DerwinskiWatai v. Brown

Regulations Cited (38 CFR / 38 USC)

38 CFR 3.303(c)38 USC 111038 USC 510138 USC 7252(a)38 USC 7261(a)(1)

Denial Type

Credibility|No Nexus|Inadequate Exam

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.