CAVC Case 98-1275: Back
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · January 12, 2000 · HOLDAWAY
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
BackKneeGIEyeArthritis
Why It Was Decided This Way
In the March 19, 1998, BVA decision here on appeal, the Board denied as not well grounded the veteran's claims for left- and right-knee and stomach disorders.
§ 1110 and 1131) to be well grounded, there generally must be: (1) Medical evidence of a current disability; (2) medical evidence, 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 the current disability.
303(b) (1998), by the submission of (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.
The credibility of the evidence presented in support of a claim is generally presumed when determining whether it is well grounded.
As to a medical opinion on nexus, the April 1996 diagnosis of bilateral post-traumatic arthritis of the knees was made following the physician's notation of only in-service traumatic events, i.
nt(s) of left-knee trauma, the Court holds that the veteran has submitted the medical evidence of a nexus between the veteran's service and his current left-knee disability that is needed to well ground this claim.
As to the second and third Caluza elements, the appellant does not argue that he has submitted evidence of a medical opinion as to a nexus between the veteran's current stomach condition and his service; instead, he submits that his claim is well grounded under the 38 C.
303(b) allows an appellant to meet the second and third Caluza requirements by the submission of (a) evidence that a condition was "noted" during service; (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.
Authorities Cited
Regulations Cited (38 CFR / 38 USC)
Denial Type
Credibility|No Nexus
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 →