12-27 051
12-27 051
| Board of Vet. App. | Jun 28, 2017Background
- Veteran served on active duty from July 1969 to September 1973 and filed for service connection for a cervical spine disability.
- In-service records (including a September 1970 incident) document facial and extremity injuries but no neck/cervical complaints or treatment; separation exam in 1973 was normal for the neck.
- Earliest medical documentation of neck problems appears in 2000 (neck pain, x‑ray/MRI showing spondylosis and disc disease); later records show progressive degenerative changes and anterior fusion.
- Veteran attributes onset to a 1970 beating and other service events; he provided lay statements but no medical opinion linking the cervical condition to service.
- VA provided a November 2016 VA medical opinion concluding it is less likely than not that the cervical condition was incurred in or caused by service, citing lack of in‑service/early postservice findings and intervening non‑service etiologies (physically strenuous postservice work).
- Board found VA satisfied duty to assist, considered the evidence and medical opinion persuasive, and denied service connection because preponderance of evidence is against nexus and no presumptive chronic disease onset within one year post‑service was shown.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Service connection for cervical spine disability | Cervical condition caused by 1970 in‑service beating and other service events; onset 1970 | No in‑service or early post‑service evidence of neck injury; first documentation in 2000; medical opinion says nexus unlikely; other nonservice causes present | Denied: preponderance of evidence against service connection; no continuity of symptomatology or presumptive onset within one year |
Key Cases Cited
- Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303 (Board may rely on an adequate VA examination)
- Dyment v. West, 13 Vet. App. 141 (remand compliance standard — substantial compliance)
- Walker v. Shinseki, 708 F.3d 1331 (continuity of symptomatology can establish nexus)
- Davidson v. Shinseki, 581 F.3d 1313 (lay evidence may be competent to establish incurrence)
- Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372 (limits on lay competence for complex medical questions)
- Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (preponderance standard and benefit-of-the-doubt rule)
- Gonzalez v. West, 218 F.3d 1378 (Board not required to discuss every piece of evidence)