Caring. Effective. Efficient.

Client Win: CAVC No. 15-1473, Vineyard v. McDonald (Service Connection of a Shoulder Injury)

Client Win: CAVC No. 15-1473, Vineyard v. McDonald (Service Connection of a Shoulder Injury)

This case involves 3 errors made by the BVA Veterans Law Judge in denying service connection of a shoulder injury. 

First, the Board of Veterans Appeals is required to address certain evidence favorable to a veteran. 38 U.S.C. § 7104(d)(1).

The BVA denied service connection of a shoulder injury by finding that the veteran “has not described or identified any lay testimony as to left shoulder symptoms in service or since service.” The BVA judge did not notice the 1978 separation examination and report of medical history, which states in the section for “physician’s summary and elaboration of all pertinent data”: “Partial dislocation, left shoulder, 1977, result of playing base football.”

Second, the BVA must ensure a veteran is afforded an adequate medical examination report concerning his claim to service connect a shoulder injury. 38 U.S.C. § 5103A(d)(1). The BVA instead relied on a VA medical opinion for the conclusion that the veteran's shoulder condition is less likely than not caused by or a result of a remote dislocation that occurred in service because the examiner could not find any evidence of a dislocation of the shoulder in the service treatment records. Not only did the examiner fail to consider the 1978 separation examination noted above, it also failed to discuss  a 1975 report of an x-ray taken of the veteran's left shoulder during service.

Third, the Board is required to substantially comply with a prior remand of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims.  Stegall v. West 11 Vet.App. 268 (1998). A prior CAVC remand had ordered the BVA to get another medical exam for the veteran's shoulder. Because the BVA did not get the required exam, it  failed to follow the Court's order. 

Based on these 3 errors surrounding the veteran's claim for service connection of a shoulder injury, the CAVC vacated and remanded the BVA decision.  

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 Joint Motion to Remand the CAVC Website.

Case Details

OGC Attorney: Laura R. Braden

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

Board of Veterans Appeals Veterans Law Judge: Matthew D. Tenner

Regional Office: Waco, Texas, VA Regional Office

Vets’ Rep at BVA: Disabled American Veterans (DAV)

Date of BVA Decision: March 18, 2015

Date of CAVC Judgment on Remand: November 12, 2015

Taking Point! Blog

Jun
3
I really can’t take it anymore. I’m sure many like you feel the same way. Every time another child with a military weapon ambushes a school full of children, I am overwhelmed with emotions that have no outlet. I can’t even process… Read More
May
27
  While on our way to the nutcracker audition at the local theatre I asked my 9-year-old daughter how her day went at school. “It was okay.  We had another active shooter drill.  When the drill started, I had to run behind and under my teacher… Read More
May
23
After years of exploring different fields, I’ve found purpose-driven work here, at Attig | Curran | Steel.   There are a lot of variables in the experience of “happy.” It is difficult to keep it continuous.  Do I feel happy when my kids… Read More
May
18
When appellate courts review the decisions of lower courts – or in administrative law where a Court like the US Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) reviews the decisions of the BVA, an administrative tribunal – they use “… Read More

Read the "Taking Point!" Blog

Recent Cases

This case involves the BVA judge’s inadequate reasoning of a denial of a veteran’s claim for an increased rating for PTSD.   The appeal was resolved through a joint motion to remand. ISSUE ON APPEAL TO THE CAVC (BVA overlooked evidence… Read More
This case involves the BVA judge’s inadequate reasoning of his denial of a veteran’s past-due benefits in a claim for an increased rating due to an increase in the severity of the veteran’s PTSD. The appeal was resolved through a jo… Read More
This case involves the BVA’s failure to comply with a Veterans Court Order in a January 2020 Memorandum Decision. The appeal was resolved through a joint motion to remand. ISSUE ON APPEAL TO THE CAVC (BVA fails to comply with Veterans Court Ord… Read More

See More Appellate Results