CAVC Case 97-1780: Back

CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · April 21, 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.

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
Remanded / Vacated
Decision Date
April 21, 1999
Judge
NEBEKER, Chief Judge
Service Era
Not specified

Conditions Claimed

BackCervicalHipHeadacheRespiratoryEyeArthritisRadiculopathy

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

BackCervicalHipHeadacheRespiratoryEyeArthritisRadiculopathy

Why It Was Decided This Way

The appellant also alleges that the Board failed to adjudicate his claim for an earlier effective date for his lumbosacral spine disorder and that that issue should be remanded to the Board for adjudication.

The Secretary concedes that the Board failed to adjudicate the effective date issue.

The Secretary also concedes that the cervical spine disorder claim should be remanded because the Board failed to adequately develop the record.

However, the Secretary contends that there is a plausible basis in the record for the Board's decision that the cervical spine injury was not service connected, and, therefore, reversal of the Board's decision is not appropriate in this matter.

The Board found that the evidence of record was against service connection for the appellant's cervical spine condition.

First, the Board found that the service and postservice medical records from 1950 to 1966 did not reference any complaints or treatment relating to a cervical spine injury.

The Board found that those contemporary medical records were more probative than the appellant's testimony that he had experienced neck pain after his jeep accident.

Lastly, the Board found that the first objective evidence of a cervical spine disorder was a February 1995 x-ray examination report that showed spondylosis of the C4 vertebrae.

Authorities Cited

Colvin v. DerwinskiEspiritu v. DerwinskiFlash v. BrownGilbert v. DerwinskiGreen v. DerwinskiHatlestad v. DerwinskiHicks v. BrownSee Brannon v. WestSee Caluza v. BrownSee Cartright v. DerwinskiSee Grottveit v. BrownSee James v. BrownSee Meyer v. BrownSee Quarles v. DerwinskiSee Reonal v. BrownSee Rose v. WestSee Stegall v. WestSolomon v. BrownThurber v. BrownZink v. Brown

Regulations Cited (38 CFR / 38 USC)

38 USC 7104(d)(1)38 USC 7252(a)

Denial Type

Credibility|No Nexus|Not Service Connected|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 →
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.