Menu
Menu

December 2, 2021 update

October 2021 Board of Veterans' Appeals decisions are now available in BVA Decision Search results

Veterans Crisis Line Badge

The Board of Veterans' Appeals Decision search results

 
Find pages with...
Page 1 of 2643 results — searched 18850
Query: ("m21-1")
incurred in or aggravated by military service. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 1110, 1153 (West 1991 & Supp. 2001); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.104, 3.303, 3.304, 3.306 (1996)(2001); VA ADJUDICATION PROCEDURE MANUAL M21-1, Part
to the development of PTSD secondary to personal assault. VA ADJUDICATION PROCEDURE MANUAL M21-1, Part III, 5.14 (April 30, 1999) (hereinafter M21-1). Because assault is an extremely personal and sensitive
or has permitted the Secretary of VA to do otherwise and the Secretary has done so. See Karnas v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 308 (1991); Baker v. West, 11 Vet. App. 163, 168 (1998). In this case, the Board
or has permitted the Secretary of VA to do otherwise and the Secretary has done so. See Karnas v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 308 (1991); Baker v. West, 11 Vet. App. 163, 168 (1998). In this case, the Board
appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Montgomery, Alabama THE ISSUES 1. Whether the veteran has submitted an adequate substantive appeal with respect to the issue of entitlement
M21-1, Part IV, directs the ROs to provide expeditious handling of all cases that have been remanded by the Board and the Court. See M21-1, Part IV, paras. 8.44-8.45 and 38.02-38.03. The appellant's representative
evidence of record to corroborate that he was actually sexually assaulted during service. However, pertinent provisions of Manual M21-1 specifically address the types of documentation that may be used to
the adjudication of asbestos exposure claims in the Adjudication Procedure Manual M21-1 (M21-1), Part VI, Par. 7.21. The VA General Counsel has held that these M21-1 guidelines establish claim development
October 2000 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office in Muskogee, Oklahoma (RO). FINDINGS OF FACT 1. All relevant evidence necessary for an equitable disposition of this
case are not before the Board. This determination is consistent with the veteran's testimony before the undersigned in April 2002, in which he made no reference to these issues. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. VA has
case to the RO in May 2001 for further development. The requested development has since been completed, and the case is again before the Board for appellate review. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. All evidence necessary
corroboration of stressors in PTSD cases involving sexual assault. In YR, the Court advised that the portions of the VA Adjudication Procedure Manual M21-1, Part III, paragraph 5.14c, provided "guidance
claim of service connection for PTSD was previously remanded, in part for compliance with VA's Adjudication Procedure Manual M21-1 (Manual M21-1), Part III, 5.14. This provision outlines specific steps
appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in No. Little Rock, Arkansas THE ISSUES 1. Entitlement to an increased disability rating for post- traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), currently
Appeals (Board) on appeal from an April 1997 rating decision from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Houston, Texas. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. All relevant evidence necessary for
Affairs (VA), which denied the veteran's claim for service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). FINDINGS OF FACT 1. All evidence necessary to decide the issue on appeal is of record. 2.
to asbestos. The information and instructions from the DVB Circular have been included in a VA Adjudication Procedure Manual, M21-1 (M21- 1), Part VI, 7.21. The United States Court of Appeals for Veterans
personal trauma. In this regard, the Court has held that VA Adjudication Procedure Manual M21-1 (Manual M21-1), Part III, 5.14c (Feb. 20, 1996), provides substantive rules in which VA has undertaken a special
are now found in Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) Adjudication Procedure Manual M21-1 (M21-1), Part VI, para. 7.21 (January 31, 1997). These guidelines note that inhalation of asbestos fibers can
CA. In July 2001, the Board remanded the case for development. The RO has completed that to the extent possible, and the case has been returned to the Board. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. All evidence necessary for
exposure and the claimed disease, keeping in mind the latency and exposure information discussed above. M21-1, Part VI, 7.21. In this case, the record shows that the RO complied with these procedures, as
Citation Nr: 0206409 Decision Date: 06/17/02 Archive Date: 06/27/02 DOCKET NO. 92-02 084 DATE ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Detroit, Michigan THE ISSUE 1. Entitlement
appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Columbia, South Carolina THE ISSUES 1. Whether new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen the veteran's claim of entitlement
there is a relationship between asbestos exposure and the claimed disease, keeping in mind pertinent latency and exposure information. M21-1, Part VI, 7.21(d)(1), p. 7-IV-3 and 7-IV-4 (January 31, 1997).
of Veterans' Appeals (Board) via a video conference at the RO in November 2001, a transcript of which has been associated with the claims file. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The veteran did not appeal the August
Moines, Iowa, which denied the veteran's claim seeking entitlement to service connection for a psychiatric disability, to include PTSD. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The veteran has a diagnosis of PTSD; the examiner
procedures on asbestos-related diseases which provide some guidelines for considering compensation claims based on exposure to asbestos in VA ADJUDICATION PROCEDURE MANUAL M21-1 (this was formerly Department
claims in the Adjudication Procedure Manual M21-1 (M21-1), Part VI, Par. 7.21. The VA General Counsel has held that these M21-1 guidelines establish claim development procedures which adjudicators are required
in March 1999 and the veteran submitted a timely substantive appeal in April 1999. The veteran testified before the undersigned member of the Board in January 2002. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The veteran did not
from any source must be provided. The special provisions of VA Adjudication Procedure Manual M21-1 (M21-1), Part III, regarding personal assault notes that: "Personal assault is an event of human design
This issue is not inextricably intertwined with the issue on appeal and is not in appellate status. Accordingly, this matter is referred to the RO for appropriate action. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. All evidence
appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Newark, New Jersey THE ISSUES 1. Entitlement to service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). 2. Entitlement to a disability
appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in St. Petersburg, Florida THE ISSUES 1. Whether new and material evidence has been received to reopen the claim of entitlement to service
appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Winston- Salem, North Carolina THE ISSUES 1. Whether new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen a claim for service connection
relevant to the claims at issue. He has been provided a VA medical examination in connection with his claims. Manual provisions of M21-1 have been adhered to as necessary in adjudication of claims based
Citation Nr: 0203358 Decision Date: 04/11/02 Archive Date: 04/18/02 DOCKET NO. 94-10 130 DATE ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Houston, Texas THE ISSUES 1. Entitlement
appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in White River Junction, Vermont THE ISSUES 1. Entitlement to service connection for rheumatoid arthritis as secondary to exposure to Agent
claim was well grounded under then-applicable law. See 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a) (West 1991). The case is again before the Board. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The veteran died in May 1995 of pneumonia due to or as
and remanded the matter for readjudication. In July 2000 and August 2001, the Board remanded the matter to the RO for further development. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Left eye amblyopia was diagnosed and noted
denied the veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD. The veteran filed a timely appeal to this adverse determination. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. There has been compliance with the duty to assist and duty
for further appellate consideration. As a preliminary matter, the Board finds that the RO has complied with the directives of the July 1998 remand. See Wood v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 190 (1991). Accordingly,
there was no indication that any attempts had been made to obtain the missing records from all potential sources as set forth in the VA Manual M21-1. The Manual provides that captains of Merchant Marine
appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania THE ISSUES 1. Entitlement to an increased rating for residuals of a penetrating gunshot wound of the right upper
to include the two Members who conducted the hearings. See 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 7102(a), 7107(c) (West 1991 & Supp. 2002). FINDINGS OF FACT 1. All relevant evidence necessary for an equitable disposition of
not been abridged. Bernard v. Brown, 4 Vet. App. 384 (1993). Veterans Benefits Administration Adjudication Procedure Manual (M21-1), Part VI, 7.21 outlines the procedures for developing claims involving
appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Louisville, Kentucky THE ISSUES 1. Entitlement to service connection for a visual disorder. 2. Entitlement to service connection for chronic
Entitlement to an effective date for payment of 50 percent disability compensation benefits for service-connected schizophreniform psychosis prior to August 1, 1994. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented
124, 130 (1996) [pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 7105, a notice of disagreement initiates appellate review in the VA administrative adjudication]. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. In an April 1986 VA rating decision, the service-
appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Oakland, California THE ISSUES 1. Entitlement to an initial compensable evaluation for infectious hepatitis, type C. 2. Whether new and
5103A(d)(1)): (a) The Secretary shall treat an examination or opinion as being necessary to make a decision on a claim for purposes of paragraph (1) [38 U.S.C.A. ง 5103A(d)(1)] if the evidence of record
Can't find what you're looking for? The Board of Veterans' Appeals Decisions search results are limited to appeal decisions only. Try searching other VA sites for ("m21-1")