10-47 633
10-47 633
| Board of Vet. App. | Mar 31, 2017Background
- Veteran served active duty Sep 1960–Sep 1964 and appealed an April 2009 RO denial of service connection for a left foot disorder.
- Service records: enlistment and separation exams (Aug 1960, Aug 1964) showed normal feet; service treatment records document motor-vehicle accidents and a left tibial laceration but no documented left foot injury; left foot x‑ray in service was negative.
- Postservice treatment: Veteran reported seeing a private podiatrist in the 1970s, but VA records show first left foot complaints in 2008 with left first metatarsophalangeal joint arthroplasty that year.
- Veteran testified at a 2014 Board hearing that his foot swelled after the in‑service car accident and progressively worsened; he did not seek consistent treatment until decades after discharge.
- VA obtained a February 2015 examination and a July 2016 addendum opinion concluding it is "less likely than not" the left foot disorder is related to service; no medical nexus opinion favoring service connection exists.
- Board found the preponderance of evidence against service connection and denied the claim, applying reasonable‑doubt doctrine but finding it inapplicable because evidence weighed against the Veteran.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Service connection for left foot disorder | Veteran contends left foot injury resulted from an in‑service motor vehicle accident and later required an implant | VA/Board contends service records lack any left foot diagnosis or treatment, separation exam normal, first VA foot complaint in 2008, and VA examiners found no nexus | Denied — preponderance of evidence against service connection |
Key Cases Cited
- Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (elements required to establish service connection)
- Scott v. McDonald, 789 F.3d 1375 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (VA duty to assist and related procedural considerations)
- Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (lay evidence competent for symptoms but not for medical diagnosis/etiology)
- Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (Vet. App. 1990) (application of the benefit‑of‑the‑doubt rule)
