Summaries After Board Of Veteran Appeals

Recent court decisions after board of veteran appeals have significantly influenced how VA disability claims are processed, providing veterans with more opportunities for benefits and clarifying key legal issues.

Learn how these few court cases can be key to your VA disability claim.

We’ve aggregated the key cases decided after board of veteran appeals. Many of these cases are key to many veteran appeals claims. The BVA or board of veteran appeals is the last step in the appellate process for a veteran in their VA Disability Claim Process.

Cases Related to Service Connection

Cases Related to Service Connection involve legal decisions that clarify or establish the criteria for proving that a veteran’s disability or medical condition is directly connected to their military service. In the context of veterans’ benefits, “service connection” is the foundational requirement for a veteran to receive disability compensation from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).

To obtain service-connected benefits, a veteran must demonstrate three key elements:

1. A current medical diagnosis of a disability or condition.
2. An in-service event, injury, or illness that can be linked to the disability.
3. A nexus (causal relationship) between the in-service event and the current disability.

Service connection cases help determine what types of evidence are sufficient to establish this link, how certain conditions should be interpreted under the law, and whether presumptions of service connection apply (for example, in cases of exposure to hazardous substances like Agent Orange). These rulings significantly influence how veterans can qualify for benefits and expand or limit the criteria for service-related compensation.

Andrews v. McDonough, 34 Vet. App. 216 (2021)

The court awarded service connection for Hepatitis C, finding that the evidence was already sufficient to grant the claim. The VA could not seek further evidence solely to deny the veteran’s claim. This ruling emphasizes the principle that when evidence supports a claim, the VA should not delay or seek reasons to deny benefits.

Frost v. Shulkin (2017)

The ruling established that secondary service connection claims are valid even if the primary condition was not recognized as service-connected at the time the secondary condition developed. It expands opportunities for veterans to receive benefits for conditions linked to their service-connected disabilities, even if the primary disability was acknowledged later.

Saunders v. Wilkie (2018)

The Federal Circuit decided that pain alone, without a specific diagnosis, qualifies as a compensable disability if it causes functional impairment. This decision simplifies the process for veterans to receive benefits for pain-related conditions, even without an underlying medical condition being identified.

Grimes v. McDonough, 34 Vet. App. 84 (2021)

This case clarified that a veteran’s disability claim should be interpreted broadly, based on a sympathetic reading of their symptoms. The court ruled that claims should include any conditions reasonably inferred from the evidence throughout the appeal. This ensures veterans get proper consideration for all potential conditions.

Procopio v. Wilkie (2019)

The ruling expanded the presumption of exposure to Agent Orange to include Blue Water Navy veterans who served offshore during the Vietnam War. This case is vital for veterans who were previously excluded from receiving benefits for conditions related to herbicide exposure.

AI Powered Chatbot for VA Disability Claims

Learn more about the VA Disability process and get help with our VA Disability Claim Chatbot programmed and trained by AI

Rating and Compensation Cases

Rating and Compensation Cases involve legal decisions that address how the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) evaluates the severity of a veteran’s service-connected disability and determines the appropriate level of compensation. Once a disability is considered service-connected, the VA assigns a disability rating, which is expressed as a percentage from 0% to 100%, in increments of 10%. This percentage represents the extent to which the disability impairs the veteran’s ability to work and function in daily life.

These cases can cover various issues, including:

1. How specific symptoms or conditions should be rated under the VA’s rating schedule.
2. The adequacy of evidence used to determine ratings, ensuring that all relevant medical and personal information is considered.
3. Entitlement to higher ratings or earlier effective dates, where veterans argue that their disability warrants a greater percentage or should have been compensated from an earlier date.
4. Legal standards for when a veteran is eligible for Total Disability based on Individual Unemployability (TDIU), where the veteran’s disabilities prevent them from securing and maintaining substantial employment, warranting compensation at the 100% rate even if their combined rating is less.

The decisions in these cases shape how disabilities are evaluated and compensated, ensuring that veterans receive fair and accurate compensation based on the severity of their conditions

Bankhead v. Shulkin, 29 Vet. App. 10 (2017)

The court held that the presence of suicidal ideation, regardless of the presence of a specific plan or intent to act on those thoughts, warrants at least a 70% disability rating for PTSD. This decision ensures that severe mental health symptoms are adequately reflected in disability ratings.

Costello v. McDonough (2023)

The court addressed the denial of a higher disability rating and earlier effective date for coronary artery disease, questioning the fairness of some VA regulations. This case emphasizes the importance of ensuring due process for veterans in the disability evaluation process.

Gilbert v. Derwinski (1990)

This foundational case established the “benefit of the doubt” rule, which directs that if the evidence for and against a claim is evenly balanced, the decision should favor the veteran. This ruling is crucial for veterans whose claims involve conflicting evidence. This makes it much easier for veterans to win claims when the evidence is unclear or conflicting.

Effective Dates and Appeals

Effective Dates and Appeals refer to legal cases that address when a veteran’s disability benefits should begin and the procedures involved in challenging the VA’s decisions regarding their claims. These cases are crucial because they determine the start date for compensation payments (known as the “effective date”) and establish the rules for how veterans can appeal unfavorable decisions.

Key aspects of Effective Dates and Appeals cases include:

1. Determining the correct effective date for disability benefits: The effective date is usually the date the VA received the claim or when the disability first arose, whichever is later. However, disputes can arise when veterans believe they are entitled to an earlier effective date based on prior claims, new evidence, or mistakes made by the VA.
2. Procedures and requirements for filing appeals: These cases clarify how veterans can challenge VA decisions, including initial claim denials, assigned disability ratings, or effective dates. This involves understanding time limits for submitting appeals, the types of evidence required, and how to navigate the appeals process.
3. Impact of withdrawals, reopenings, and reconsiderations of claims: Some cases address situations where veterans withdraw an appeal or where new evidence leads to reopening a previously denied claim. Legal decisions help define how these actions affect the effective date and benefits eligibility.
4. Resolving ambiguities in claims: Veterans law often favors the veteran when there is reasonable doubt about the evidence or the interpretation of regulations. Cases involving effective dates and appeals may focus on whether the VA has given proper consideration to the veteran’s statements, medical records, and legal arguments.

These rulings shape how benefits are awarded and ensure that veterans have a fair opportunity to challenge VA decisions, potentially increasing the amount of retroactive benefits owed if an earlier effective date is established.

Crews v. McDonough, 35 Vet. App. 81 (2023)

The ruling confirmed that the retroactive-effective-date provisions of the Blue Water Navy Vietnam Veterans Act apply broadly, not just to cases previously denied for lack of exposure evidence. This benefits veterans who were exposed to Agent Orange by potentially allowing earlier effective dates for their claims.

Martinez v. McDonough (2023)

The case focused on effective dates for Total Disability Individual Unemployability (TDIU), examining the validity of appeal withdrawals and the impact of cognitive impairments. The court emphasized that ambiguities should be resolved in favor of the veteran.

Procedural Requirements for VA Claims

Procedural Requirements for VA Claims refer to legal cases that establish or clarify the rules and processes the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) must follow when evaluating and adjudicating veterans’ disability claims. These cases ensure that veterans’ claims are handled fairly, thoroughly, and in accordance with the law, focusing on the quality and completeness of the procedures used in the claims process.

Key elements of Procedural Requirements for VA Claims include:

1. Standards for VA medical examinations and evaluations: These cases address what constitutes an adequate medical examination, including the requirements for assessing the veteran’s condition (such as specific testing procedures or considering the veteran’s own statements). The rulings help ensure that exams accurately reflect the severity of the disability.
2. Requirements for handling evidence: The VA must consider all relevant evidence submitted by the veteran, including medical records, personal statements, and lay evidence. Procedural cases may focus on how the VA weighs this evidence and whether it has properly addressed ambiguities in favor of the veteran.
3. Appeal procedures and decision-making processes: These cases define the procedural steps the VA and the Board of Veterans’ Appeals must follow during the appeals process, including notification requirements, timelines for decision-making, and criteria for reopening claims based on new and material evidence.
4. Ensuring compliance with legal standards: Some rulings establish the VA’s duty to follow specific legal requirements, such as providing the veteran with proper notice, assisting in obtaining evidence, and explaining decisions adequately. This ensures that veterans receive a fair review of their claims and are not disadvantaged by procedural errors.
5. Class action and broader procedural challenges: In some cases, veterans challenge procedural policies affecting groups of veterans (class action), requiring the VA to make systemic changes to how claims are processed.

These cases play a critical role in protecting veterans’ rights by setting standards for the procedures the VA must use, ensuring that the claims process is transparent, fair, and just.

Correia v. McDonald, 28 Vet. App. 158 (2016)

The court required VA examinations for joint disabilities to include specific range of motion tests under various conditions (passive, active, weight-bearing, and non-weight-bearing). This ensures evaluations reflect the true impact of joint conditions.

Edwards v. McDonough (2023)

The court ruled that the VA must thoroughly consider all evidence submitted and ensure that any ambiguities are resolved in favor of the veteran. This decision improves the accuracy and fairness of the claims adjudication process.

Kernz v. McDonough

The case examined the appealability of Board of Veterans’ Appeals decisions and clarified the requirements for class action certification. It provided guidance on how veterans can challenge the Board’s decisions and pursue class actions.

Miller v. Wilkie, 32 Vet. App. 249 (2020)

The ruling clarified that a VA medical examination is inadequate if it fails to consider the veteran’s own statements about their symptoms. Veterans are entitled to a new examination if their experiences were not properly considered initially.

Brown v. Gardner (1994)

The Supreme Court ruled that in cases of injury due to VA treatment under 38 U.S.C. § 1151, the government must prove there was no fault. This decision helps veterans seeking benefits for injuries caused by VA medical care even if there was no negligence or malpractice.

Barry v. McDonough (2022)

This case focused on Special Monthly Compensation (SMC) benefits for veterans requiring aid and attendance due to multiple disabilities. The court ruled that veterans with several severe disabilities needing aid and attendance can qualify for higher levels of SMC, even if their conditions aren’t all connected. This decision expands access to increased compensation for veterans facing multiple severe disabilities, particularly those with complex medical needs who require additional support.

Benefits for Survivors

Benefits for Survivors refer to legal cases that address the eligibility and entitlement of family members, such as spouses, children, or parents, to receive benefits after a veteran’s death. These benefits are provided in recognition of the sacrifices made by the veteran and their family, and they ensure ongoing financial support for survivors.

Key aspects of Benefits for Survivors cases include:

1. Eligibility for Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC): DIC is a tax-free monthly benefit paid to eligible survivors of service members who died in the line of duty or veterans whose death resulted from a service-connected condition. Legal cases often address who qualifies for DIC, including whether remarriage affects eligibility or if certain conditions should be considered service-connected for DIC purposes.
2. Accrued benefits: These cases deal with benefits that were due to the veteran at the time of their death but were not yet paid. Survivors may be eligible to receive these unpaid benefits, especially if they filed a claim on behalf of the deceased veteran or contributed to the veteran’s care during their last illness.
3. Burial benefits and expenses: Survivors may seek reimbursement for expenses related to the veteran’s funeral, burial, or last illness. Legal cases can clarify the conditions under which these benefits are provided, including eligibility criteria for different types of burial allowances.
4. Retroactive benefits and effective dates for survivors: Cases in this area may involve disputes over the start date for survivor benefits, potentially increasing the amount of back pay owed to the surviving family members if an earlier effective date is established.
5. Procedures for survivors’ claims and appeals: These rulings define how survivors can pursue claims for benefits, including filing deadlines, requirements for reopening claims, and the appeals process for denied benefits.

Legal decisions related to Benefits for Survivors help to ensure that the families of veterans receive the support they are entitled to, providing financial stability and recognition of the veteran’s service even after their death.

Helmick v. McDonough, 34 Vet. App. 141 (2021)

The court held that accrued benefits may be paid to a survivor who provided financial support for a veteran’s or widow’s last illness and burial. This ensures that individuals who helped cover these expenses can receive any unpaid benefits due to the veteran.

Ventris v. McDonough, 34 Vet. App. 300 (2021)

The court ruled that a surviving spouse who remarried after the veteran’s death is eligible for Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) benefits if the remarriage ended in divorce. This decision broadens eligibility for DIC benefits, ensuring surviving spouses are not excluded due to subsequent marital changes.