BVA Decisions on Skin

80 real veterans-appeals decisions on VA disability claims involving skin — Board of Veterans' Appeals decisions and U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decisions, each labeled with its court. Each links to the full decision, reasoning, and citations.

Sponsored

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.

What would this rating pay you? (2026 rates)

Official 2026 VA monthly compensation, including the 2.8% COLA increase.

Rating 10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Married Children 01234

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)

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

See your full claim picture — free

• CAVCCase 96-1214 — Affirmed / Vacated / Remanded 1999-02-11
  In the May 28, 1996, BVA decision here on appeal, the Board denied service connection for wounds of the lower extremities, frostbite of the feet, a skin disorder of the feet, heari...
• CAVCCase 22-1071 — Vacated 2021-10-26
  October 2019 Board Remand and Development In an October 2019 remand order,the Board found that a new VA examination was required to address the severity of her service-connected le...
• CAVCCase 22-4960 — Vacated / Remanded / Affirmed 2022-04-27
  The next month, another audiologist provided a negative nexus opinion....
• CAVCCase 12-1845 — Reversed / Vacated / Remanded 2012-05-21
  For the reasons that follow,the Court will reverse the Board's finding that the veteran did not submit new and material evidence sufficient to reopen his 1 The Board referred to a ...
• CAVCCase 99-179 — Vacated 1999-01-20
  The appellant , appeals a January 20, 1999, decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals (BVA or Board) that (1) determined that new and material evidence had not been submitted to r...
• CAVCCase 93-1220 — Affirmed / Vacated / Remanded 1996-08-01
  In a September 1978 BVA decision, the Board denied service connection for a back disability....
• CAVCCase 10-1267 — Remanded / Affirmed / Reversed / Vacated 2010-04-05
  , through counsel,appeals an April 5, 2010,Board of Veterans'Appeals (Board)decision in which the Board denied the appellant's claims to reopen a previously denied claim for servic...
• CAVCCase 22-1946 — Vacated / Remanded 2024-09-16
  VA advised him that the claim was previously denied in February 1981 and that he needed to submit new and material evidence to reopen it....
• CAVCCase 15-3657 — Remanded / Vacated / Reversed / Affirmed 2015-05-28
  Finally,the Board denied effective dates earlier than March 5,2009,for the grants of service connection for right ear hearing loss and tinnitus....
• CAVCCase 14-0138 — Vacated / Remanded 2013-12-27
  In the December 27,2013,decision on appeal,the Board denied disability compensation for migraine headaches,a central nervous system disability manifested by dizziness,bilateral hea...
• CAVCCase 22-6596 — Vacated / Remanded / Affirmed 2021-11-17
  The appellant , through counsel appeals a November 17,2021, Board of Veterans'Appeals (Board)decision denying disability compensation for bilateral hearing loss and determining tha...
• CAVCCase 22-1803 — Unknown 2021-11-26
  The veteran asserted that though he was granted service connection in March 1985 for neuropathy of the left common peroneal nerve,the March 1985 rating decision did not address ser...
• CAVCCase 23-4298 — Affirmed / Vacated / Remanded 2024-06-06
  Additionally,the Board awarded disability compensation for pseudofolliculitis barbae and found that new and material evidence had been submitted to reopen claims for disability com...
• CAVCCase 09-0929 — Affirmed 2008-11-20
  The appellant's symptomatology relating to plantar fasciitis was not related to cold exposure in service,but that his sensitivity with associated parathesias and numbness is second...
• CAVCCase 24-293 — Remanded 2025-05-30
  Specifically,the Board noted that the appellant reported to have received treatment for all his claim conditions at Munson Army Health Center in Ft....
• CAVCCase 23-2641 — Vacated / Remanded 2024-07-02
  Therefore, [his] skin condition is at least as likely as not related to his military service....
• CAVCCase 94-1080 — Affirmed / Vacated 1996-11-26
  Subsequently, the RO and then the Board denied service connection for residuals of a head injury....
• CAVCCase 18-4445 — Vacated / Remanded / Affirmed 2018-04-20
  First,we are asked to decide whether the Board failed to discuss medical evidence showing that PVD of the left lower extremity had first manifested in January 2006 warranting an ea...
• CAVCCase 10-0397 — Affirmed 2009-12-15
  This evaluation did not provide a medical opinion regarding a nexus between the appellant....
• CAVCCase 21-3379 — Affirmed / Vacated / Remanded 2021-03-17
  Following the examination,VA sought an additional medical opinion,explaining that the prior examiner also noted a diagnosis of benign prostatic hypertrophy (BPH),a condition that i...
• CAVCCase 12-2012 — Affirmed / Remanded / Vacated 2012-02-29
  The appellant averred that the veteran submitted new and material evidence within the one-year appeal period and that VA had failed to adjudicate the claim on the merits....
• CAVCCase 04-0584 — Vacated / Remanded / Affirmed / Reversed 2009-10-02
  In my opinion he is allergic to certain paints and vapo[r]and these occa[s]ional respiratory symptoms are not related to the exposure of fumes in Gulf War....
• CAVCCase 23-4310 — Vacated / Remanded 2024-11-14
  The Board found that neither the October 2020 nor the November 2020 examiner had adequately addressed whether VA had acted carelessly or negligently by not properly numbing the inc...
• CAVCCase 21-0697 — Vacated / Remanded 2020-10-06
  In the October 2020 decision on appeal,the Board denied an initial rating greater than 10% for tinea pedis with onychomycosis and denied service connection for a low back disabilit...
• CAVCCase 12-3649 — Affirmed / Vacated / Remanded 2011-06-09
  As an initial matter,the Board found that VA had satisfied its duty to assist because (1)VA had obtained the veteran's SMRs and there was no indication in the record that additiona...
• CAVCCase 21-0226 — Vacated / Remanded 2023-04-17
  In the November 2020 decision on appeal,the Board denied entitlement to an effective date prior to September 5,2018,for the award of benefits for CAD....
• CAVCCase 04-181 — Vacated / Remanded 2006-03-31
  The appellant, through counsel, appeals an October 8, 2003, Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board or BVA) decision that determined that he had not presented new and material evidence t...
• CAVCCase 15-1477 — Affirmed / Remanded 2015-03-19
  Decision on Appeal In the March 2015 decision on appeal,the Board determined that the appellant....
• CAVCCase 19-8155 — Vacated / Remanded / Affirmed 2019-08-13
  In his informal brief, the appellant does not challenge the Board's denial of an earlier effective date for the award of benefits of bilateral instability of the knees,or the Board...
• CAVCCase 07-0764 — Remanded / Affirmed / Vacated 2007-02-01
  Initially,the Court notes that it lacks jurisdiction over the claims for a skin disorder,bilateral hearing loss,increased ratings for an undiagnosed illness manifested by joint pai...
• CAVCCase 17-1531 — Affirmed / Vacated / Remanded 2017-03-28
  In addition, the Board denied entitlement to higher evaluations for bilateral lower extremity peripheral neuropathy as well as entitlement to earlier effective dates for the awards...
• CAVCCase 11-2889 — Affirmed 2011-08-05
  Specifically,the Board denied (1)the PTSD claim because there was no evidence of a diagnosis of PTSD (R....
• CAVCCase 15-3362 — Affirmed 2015-08-24
  The appellant ,appeals pro se an August 24,2015, Board of Veterans'Appeals (Board)decision that found that new and material evidence had not been submitted to reopen his previously...
• CAVCCase 21-4066 — Affirmed / Vacated / Remanded 2021-05-22
  In the May 2021 decision here on appeal, the Board denied the appellant....
• CAVCCase 98-157 — Affirmed
  In August 1984, the VARO notified the appellant that new and material evidence was required to reopen his claim....
• CAVCCase 16-2334 — Vacated / Remanded 2016-04-12
  The appellant expressly asked VA why it did not consider her right hip labral tear a disability separate from her right hip bursitis....
• CAVCCase 22-7103 — Unknown 2022-09-20
  The VA treatment provider who evaluated him submitted nexus letters dated in March 2016....
• CAVCCase 17-0010 — Vacated / Remanded 2016-09-07
  The examiner determined that the lumbar strain and left 2 knee strain were at least as likely as not related to service,but found that the degenerative disc disease of the lumbar s...
• CAVCCase 21-8248 — Unknown 2021-12-01
  In a July 2017 rating decision,the RO declined to reopen the claim for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder,claimed as nerves, depression,anxiety,and post-trauma...
• CAVCCase 09-4612 — Affirmed / Remanded / Vacated 2009-09-03
  On May 23,1989,the Board denied a disability rating for headaches in excess of 10%....
• CAVCCase 13-0949 — Vacated / Remanded 2013-02-28
  Although most of his service medical records (SMRs)were destroyed in the 1973 fire at the 1 The Board also remanded the issue of whether new and material evidence had been received...
• CAVCCase 22-6636 — Vacated / Remanded 2025-02-21
  at 920,and opined that the appellant's hypertension was not related to his sinusitis....
• CAVCCase 12-3354 — Affirmed / Vacated / Remanded 2012-09-25
  In the September 2012 decision on appeal�discussed in greater detail below�the Board denied (1)a request to reopen a claim for compensation under 38 U....
• BVACase 78-144 — Vacated / Remanded 2006-03-31
  had t presented new and material evidence to reopen his previously and finally denied claims the appellant 04-181....
• CAVCCase 14-1940 — Vacated / Remanded / Affirmed 2014-04-16
  In July 2007,the Board denied a higher initial disability evaluation for right CTS but remanded the cervical strain and onychomycosis claims for additional development in complianc...
• CAVCCase 20-7943 — Vacated / Remanded 2020-07-24
  Many of these conditions couldbe service connected on a presumptive,direct,or secondary basis upon demonstration that the veteran served in Vietnam � but the Board failed to adequa...
• CAVCCase 95-574 — Reversed / Affirmed / Vacated / Remanded 1987-05-01
  FARLEY, Judge : This is an appeal from a March 10, 1995, decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals (BVA or Board) which determined that new and material evidence had not been subm...
• CAVCCase 13-3414 — Affirmed 2013-09-19
  SCHOELEN, Judge :The pro se the appellant , appeals a September 19,2013, Board of Veterans'Appeals (Board)decision in which the Board denied his claims for disability compensation ...
• CAVCCase 23-5928 — Unknown 2025-02-20
  PIETSCH, Judge :The appellant appeals the June 16, 2023,Board of Veterans'Appeals (Board)decision in which the Board denied the appellant's claims for entitlement to service connec...
• CAVCCase 18-4075 — Vacated / Remanded 2020-11-30
  Additionally,the Board found that a December 1999 rating decision denying service connection for right thigh hematoma residuals was final;found that the appellant submitted new and...
• CAVCCase 08-2682 — Remanded / Affirmed / Vacated 2008-05-16
  In the decision here on appeal,the Board denied entitlement to service connection for PTSD, bilateral flat feet,a left ankle condition,right ear hearing loss,and tinnitus because i...
• CAVCCase 07-1699 — Affirmed / Vacated 2007-05-24
  The appellant ,appeals a May 24,2007,Board of Veterans'Appeals (Board)decision in which the Board denied her claims for (1) entitlement to service connection for the cause of her h...
• CAVCCase 12-0444 — Vacated / Affirmed / Remanded 2011-12-21
  In the other decision,the Board denied entitlement to disability compensation for back and left leg disabilities,finding that the appellant's back condition is not related to servi...
• CAVCCase 06-1930 — Vacated / Remanded / Affirmed 2006-03-10
  Because the Board failed to provide adequate reasons or bases for its denial of a disability rating in excess of 40% for degenerative joint disease of the lumbar spine and sacroili...
• CAVCCase 24-7617 — Vacated / Remanded 2025-09-30
  At a VA skin conditions examination the same month,the examiner diagnosed tinea pedis with a 1969 date of onset but did not opine as to nexus....
• CAVCCase 13-3039 — Vacated / Remanded 1953-12-09
  An October 1993 rating decision found,inter alia,that the information submitted did not constitute new and material evidence sufficient to reopen the claim....
• CAVCCase 11-0200 — Affirmed / Remanded 2010-10-07
  First,she asserts that the Board erred in failing to award her a disability rating in excess of 10%for her hemorrhoid and lumbar spine claims....
• CAVCCase 19-5367 — Vacated / Remanded / Affirmed 2019-04-16
  1 For the reasons that follow, the Court will set aside 1 In the same decision,the Board denied service connection for sleep apnea and a toenail fungus; denied entitlement to an in...
• CAVCCase 15-0540 — Vacated / Remanded 2014-12-09
  In the December 2014 decision here on appeal,the Board found that a disability rating in excess of 30% was not warranted....
• CAVCCase 19-3131 — Unknown 2019-04-04
  In the same decision,the Board found that there was new and material evidenceto reopen a claim of serviceconnection for arthritis of the bilateral hands....
• CAVCCase 10-2595 — Vacated / Remanded 2010-07-23
  In October 2009,the appellant was provided a VA medical examination to analyze whether there is a nexus between his current disabilities and his service....
• CAVCCase 24-6198 — Vacated / Remanded / Affirmed 2025-07-30
  The appellant underwent a VA scar examination in September 2021, and the examiner opined that the scars documented in previous VA examination reports and the recurrent carbuncles w...
• CAVCCase 98-772 — Affirmed 1999-09-20
  In a rating decision of November 1994, the VA regional office (RO) confirmed and continued the denial of the appellant's claim for service connection for residuals of a head injury...
• CAVCCase 00-7171 — Reversed / Affirmed / Vacated / Remanded 1999-12-23
  In the first decision (Decision 1), the Board denied the appellant's claim for an effective date earlier than January 2, 1997, for his service-connected disorder of the larynx, inc...
• CAVCCase 21-5002 — Remanded / Vacated 2021-04-19
  Whether a medical opinion is adequate is a finding of fact,which this Court reviews under the 'clearly erroneous'standard....
• CAVCCase 95-673 — Affirmed 1997-04-09
  FARLEY, Judge: This is an appeal from an April 4, 1995, decision of the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (BVA or Board) which determined that new and material evidence had not been submi...
• CAVCCase 14-2952 — Affirmed / Vacated / Remanded 2014-06-30
  For the reasons that follow, the Court will vacate the Board's June 2014 decision denying entitlement to service connection for sleep apnea to the extent that the Board did not add...
• CAVCCase 13-1123 — Affirmed / Remanded / Vacated 2012-12-17
  1 The Board decision also found that there was new and material evidence to reopen the appellant's claim for bilateral hearing loss and granted disability compensation for bilatera...
• CAVCCase 06-7279 — Affirmed / Remanded / Vacated 2005-09-01
  The appellant , through counsel, appeals a BOOKMARK/ September 1, 2005, Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) decision in which the Board denied his claims for service connection for ...
• CAVCCase 13-2827 — Vacated / Remanded 2013-09-09
  The appellant does not present any argument concerning the Board's denial of an evaluation in excess of 10%for residuals of a right inguinal hernia or the finding that he had not s...
• BVACase 23029996 — Remanded 2023-05-23
  The additional documentation submitted since the September 2009 rating decision is new and material and raises a reasonable possibility of substantiating the Veteran's claim of ser...
• CAVCCase 20-7109 — Unknown 2020-06-15
  In its June 2020 decision,the Board determined that the appellant's cervical spine condition is not causally or etiologically due to service,nor is it proximately due to or aggrava...
• CAVCCase 12-1234 — Affirmed 2012-03-14
  ,appeals,through counsel,a March 14, 2012,Board of Veterans'Appeals (Board)decision finding that he had not submitted new and material evidence sufficient to reopen a previously de...
• CAVCCase 09-0610 — Affirmed 2008-12-15
  ANALYSIS A Board determination of the appropriate degree of disability under the rating code is a finding of fact subject to the clearly erroneous standard of review....
• CAVCCase 14-0396 — Affirmed 2013-12-20
  He contends that the Board erred in finding that he was not entitled to a presumption of service connection under 38 U....
• CAVCCase 20-4401 — Reversed / Remanded / Vacated 2020-05-21
  7 The Secretary concedes that the Board failed to adequately support its decision because it did not reconcile conflicting evidence about whether appellant suffered additional disa...
• CAVCCase 19-2253 — Vacated / Remanded 2018-12-17
  In March 2011,the VA regional office (RO) denied the claims for a skin condition and bilateral hearing loss, finding that they were not service connected....
• CAVCCase 18-2837 — Remanded 2018-05-21
  Because the Board did not ensure that VA satisfied its duty to assist and failed to provide an adequate statement of its reasons or bases for denying appellant's claims, we will se...
• CAVCCase 10-4097 — Affirmed 2010-09-20
  First,he contends that the Board erred in rejecting the lay statement of fellow soldier,Ray Hermosura,based upon its conclusion that the appellant was not credible....
• CAVCCase 13-3507 — Affirmed 2013-07-02
  The appellant argues that the Board erred in its (1)threshold determination that she was not credible,and (2) determinations to deny benefits....