Gilbert v. Shinseki, 749 F.3d 1370 (Apr. 24, 2014)
PRESUMPTION OF SOUNDNESS, NEXUS ELEMENT
The
presumption of soundness does not relieve the claimant of the burden of
establishing all three elements of service connection (current
condition, in-service injury, nexus between the two).
The
veteran was denied service connection for a psychiatric condition. The
record contained evidence that he had experienced depression and
substance abuse prior to service and that he continued to abuse alcohol
while in the Navy. To rebut the presumption of soundness, the government
must show with “clear and unmistakable evidence” that the condition
both pre-existed service and was not aggravated by service. The Board
determined that the government proved that the veteran’s psychiatric
condition pre-existed service, but did not show that the condition was
not aggravated by service. Nevertheless, the Board affirmed the denial
because the veteran failed to prove that his post-service psychiatric
condition was related to his military service. The CAVC affirmed.
On
appeal to the Federal Circuit, the veteran argued that the CAVC
misinterpreted 38 U.S.C. § 1111. He argued that § 1111 relieves him of
having to prove a nexus between his current condition and service. The
Federal Circuit disagreed and found that “‘the presumption of soundness
relates to the second element required to establish a right to
disability compensation—the showing of an in-service incurrence or
aggravation of a disease or injury.’” (quoting Holton v. Shinseki, 557
F.3d 1362, 1367 (Fed. Cir. 2009). The Federal Circuit found that the
“‘presumption of soundness does not relate to the nexus requirement”
and, therefore, “does not relieve the veteran of the obligation to show
the presence of a current disability and to demonstrate a nexus between
that disability and the in-service injury or disease or aggravation
thereof.’” Id.
No comments:
Post a Comment