Caring. Effective. Efficient.

BVA failed to address favorable opinion for service connection of a hip disability

BVA failed to address favorable opinion for service connection of a hip disability

(December 5, 2016) This case involves a BVA denial of service connection of a hip disability.

Because the  Office of General Counsel did not agree there was remandable error in regards to the BVA's failure to grant service connection of a hip disability, this appeal was fully briefed to the CAVC.

After the briefs, CAVC Judge Kasold wrote a single judge decision finding that when it denied service connection of a hip disability, the BVA erred when it failed to consider or discuss an April 2012 private medical opinion that the veteran's in-service duties likely caused his current hip disability.

The BVA must correctly apply the law, provide an adequate statement of reasons or bases for its determinations. Tucker v. West, 11 Vet.App. 369 (1998). To be adequate, a BVA decision must  enable a claimant to understand the precise basis for its decision, as well as to facilitate review in the CAVC. Allday v. Brown, 7 Vet.App. 517 (1995) 

The CAVC vacated the BVA decision and remanded it back to the BVA to consider the evidence it overlooked in the veteran's claim for service connection of a hip disability.

Does this case sound like your VA Rating Decision or BVA Decision? If so, click here to have  Attig | Steel take a look at your case.

Link to the BVA Decision on CAVC Website.

Link to the CAVC Memorandum Decision

Case Details

OGC Attorney: Brent A. Bowker

Veteran Representation at CAVC: Chris Attig (link to bio)

Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims Judge:Judge Bruce E. Kasold (link to bio)

Board of Veterans Appeals Veterans Law Judge: L.M. Barnard

Regional Office: Little Rock, Arkansas, VA Regional Office

Vets’ Rep at BVA: Military Order of the Purple Heart of the U.S.A. 

Date of BVA Decision: October 23, 2014

Date of CAVC Judgment on Remand:  December 5, 2016

Recent Cases

This case involves the special, and very powerful, Nehmer effective date rules.  Mr. Greene, the veteran, sought an effective date for his service connected coronary artery disease. He argued his effective date should go back to 2006, the first clai… Read More
This case involves the BVA’s rejection of a theory of service connection by aggravation for a back condition. The BVA refused to service connect the veteran’s back injury, which he argued was aggravated by service-connected knee and hip i… Read More
  This case involves a veteran who served in the Air Force from 1953 to 1957. During service, he injured his back on a flight line, and has repeatedly tried to service connect the injury since leaving service in 1957. Each time, the claim was de… Read More

See More Appellate Results

VA Form 21 Blog

Sep
30
Earlier this year, I tested an idea – what if a group of lawyers grabbed a virtual cup of coffee every Monday morning and chatted about their progress building a profitable law firm that prioritizes the attorney’s well being? Thos… Read More
Sep
6
If you hear the phrase, lawyers with a purpose, what is your immediate reaction? Do you roll your eyes? Yawn? Close this page and find something else to read? I’ll be honest, the first time a business coach told me that my law practice… Read More

Read the VA Form 21 Blog