ANKLE IMPAIRMENT OF

STEVEN D. REISS · 2026 · Case ID: A26040710

GRANTED

Summary

The Veteran, a Marine Corps Veteran who served from April 1987 to September 1996, including service in the Persian Gulf, appeals the denial of service connection for a right ankle disability, diagnosed as a right ankle sprain. The Veteran testified that the injury occurred in service, resulting in chronic pain and instability that has persisted since that time. He reported being on crutches for six to eight weeks in service and receiving Motrin, but no imaging was performed. The Board found that the Veteran's lay testimony and statements were competent and credible, detailing the onset of symptoms in service and their continuity. While a June 2022 VA examination opined that the condition was less likely than not related to service, the Board accorded it limited weight, noting the examiner disregarded the Veteran's consistent account and mistakenly referenced a recent left ankle injury. The Board found the evidence, including service treatment records reflecting a right ankle complaint, supported the Veteran's claim. Resolving doubt in the Veteran's favor, the Board granted service connection for the right ankle disability.

Rationale

Competent and credible lay testimony regarding onset and continuity of symptoms since service.; Service treatment records reflect a right ankle complaint.; Resolving doubt in Veteran's favor.

Service Branch

MARINE CORPS

Special Benefit

NO SPECIAL BENEFIT

Docket No.

221205-301830

Full Decision Text

Citation Nr: A26040710
Decision Date: 04/30/26 Archive Date: 04/30/26

DOCKET NO. 221205-301830
DATE: April 30, 2026

ORDER

Service connection for right ankle disability, diagnosed as right ankle sprain, is granted.

FINDING OF FACT

Resolving doubt in the Veteran's favor, the Veteran's right ankle disability had its onset in service and is related to service.

CONCLUSION OF LAW

The criteria for entitlement to service connection for right ankle disability, diagnosed as right ankle sprain, have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§?1110, 1117, 1119, 1131, 1154(a), 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§?3.102, 3.159, 3.303.

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION

The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Marine Corps from April 1987 to September 1996, to include service in the Persian Gulf, and additional service in the Reserves.

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an August 2022 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The August 2022 rating decision constitutes an initial decision thus the modernized review system applies, also known as the Appeals Modernization Act (AMA).

By way of procedural history, in the September 2014 rating decision, the RO denied service connection for right ankle disability.

In February 2022, the Veteran filed a supplemental claim for right ankle disability, provided additional evidence, and in the August 2022 rating decision, the RO determined that new and relevant evidence was received and confirmed and continued the denial of service connection for right ankle disability.

In the December 2022 VA Form 10182, the Veteran appealed the August 2022 rating decision and elected the Hearing docket. Therefore, the Board may only consider the evidence of record at the time of notice of the August 2022 agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) decision, as well as any evidence submitted by the Veteran within 90 days following the hearing. 38 C.F.R. § 20.302(a).

The Veteran testified at a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge in April 2026. At the April 2026 Board hearing the Veteran waived the 90-day period following the proceeding during which time he could submit additional evidence in support of his claim.? 38?C.F.R. §?20.300(b).? As?such, and because the Board is granting in full the benefit?sought?on appeal, the Board will proceed to adjudicate this matter.

Service Connection

Service connection?generally will?be awarded when a veteran has a disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service.? 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a).?

Service connection may be granted for any disease diagnosed after discharge, when all the evidence, including that pertinent to service,?establishes?that the disease was incurred in service.? 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d).??????

To establish service connection on a direct basis, the evidence must show: (1) a current disability; (2) incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury in service; and (3) a link between the current disability and the disease or injury incurred or?aggravated in service (the "nexus" element).??Holton v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1363, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2009).???????

Due consideration?shall be given to the places, types, and circumstances of a veteran's service as shown by the service record, the official history of each?organization in which a veteran served, medical records, and all pertinent medical and lay evidence. ?38 U.S.C. § 1154(a).???

The Board is charged with the duty to assess the credibility and weight given to evidence.??Madden v. Gober, 125 F.3d 1477, 1481 (Fed. Cir. 1997),?cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1046 (1998);?Wensch?v. Principi, 15?Vet. App.?362, 367 (2001).? Indeed, in?Jefferson v. Principi, 271 F.3d 1072 (Fed. Cir. 2001), the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit), citing its decision in?Madden, recognized that that Board had inherent fact-finding ability.??Id. at 1076; see also 38 U.S.C. § 7104(a).? Moreover, the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) has declared that in?adjudicating?a claim, the Board has the responsibility to weigh and assess the evidence.??Bryan v. West, 13?Vet. App.?482, 488-89 (2000);?Wilson v.?Derwinski, 2?Vet. App.?614, 618 (1992).?????

In making all determinations, the Board must fully consider the lay assertions of record.? A layperson is competent to report on the onset and recurrence of symptoms. Layno?v. Brown,?6?Vet. App.?465, 470?(1994) (a Veteran is competent to report on that of which he or she has personal knowledge).? Lay evidence can also be competent and sufficient evidence of a diagnosis or to establish etiology if (1) the layperson is competent to identify the medical condition, (2) the layperson is reporting a contemporaneous medical diagnosis, or (3) lay testimony describing symptoms at the time supports a later diagnosis by a medical professional. Davidson v. Shinseki,?581 F.3d 1313, 1316?(Fed. Cir. 2009);?Jandreau v. Nicholson,?492 F.3d 1372, 1376-77?(Fed. Cir. 2007).???????

As a finder of fact, when considering whether lay evidence is satisfactory, the Board may also?properly consider?internal inconsistency of the statements, facial plausibility, consistency with other evidence?submitted?on behalf of the Veteran, and the Veteran's demeanor when testifying at a hearing.??See?Dalton v. Nicholson, 21?Vet. App.?23, 38 (2007);?Caluza v. Brown, 7?Vet. App.?498, 511 (1995), aff'd per curiam, 78 F.3d 604 (Fed. Cir. 1996).?????

1. Service connection for right ankle disability, diagnosed as right ankle sprain, is granted.

The Veteran seeks service connection for right ankle disability, diagnosed as right ankle sprain, and urges that his condition is related to service as his symptoms had its onset in service. See April 2026 hearing transcript; see also January 2014 correspondence; June 2022 VA examination.

The Veteran reported, in detailed hearing testimony, that he suffers from chronic pain and instability in his right ankle that manifested in service and has been symptomatic since that time. The Veteran testified that he injured his ankle in-service and was on crutches for six to eight weeks, requiring light duty. The Veterans also explained that he received Motrin in-service, but did not receive an X-Ray or MRI, and was just told that he had "possible torn ligaments." The Veteran testified that he had follow-up treatments for pain, and that his ankles ache and roll all the time, and that his pain, instability, and swelling has never resolved, since service. See April 2026 hearing transcript.

Here, as explained below, the Board finds that all three elements of direct service connection are established by the competent and credible lay and medical evidence of record as to the Veteran's right ankle condition. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303; Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1166-67 (Fed. Cir. 2004).

Turning to the evidence, in the August 2022 rating decision, the RO made favorable findings that the Veteran has been diagnosed as having a right ankle sprain, confirmed in the June 2022 VA examination. The evidence shows that a qualifying event, injury, or disease had its onset in service, to
finds that all three elements of direct service connection are established by the competent and credible lay and medical evidence of record as to the Veteran's right ankle condition. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303; Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1166-67 (Fed. Cir. 2004).

Turning to the evidence, in the August 2022 rating decision, the RO made favorable findings that the Veteran has been diagnosed as having a right ankle sprain, confirmed in the June 2022 VA examination. The evidence shows that a qualifying event, injury, or disease had its onset in service, to include service treatment records (STRs) reflecting a right ankle complaint. These are favorable findings by which the Board is bound. See 38 U.S.C. § 5104a; 38 C.F.R. § 3.104(c).

As the finder of fact, the Board concludes that the first and second element of service connection can be reasonably conceded. What remains necessary is competent evidence of a nexus between the current right ankle sprain and service.

With regard to this last element, there is evidence for and against the claim.

The Veteran was afforded a VA examination for his ankle conditions in June 2022. In the June 2022 VA examination, the examiner noted an onset of his right ankle injury in-service, and that the Veteran has constant pain and instability since onset. The Veteran consistently, competently and credibly reported chronic pain and problems in his right ankle since service, describing the onset as reported in the April 2026 hearing.

However, in the June 2022 VA medical opinion, the examiner opined that the Veteran's right ankle condition was less likely than not incurred in or caused by the claimed in-service injury, event, or illness. The examiner's rationale was based on a lack of chronicity of treatment, and the Veteran's ankle sprain occurred recently per his history. However, the Board notes that the examiner relied on a recent injury to his left ankle, and not his right ankle.

While the Board acknowledges the June 2022 negative nexus opinion, the Board accords limited probative weight as the examiner failed to provide an adequate assessment regarding the Veteran's right ankle condition. The examiner effectively disregarded the Veteran's competent and credible lay account of having symptoms during service and since, reported during the VA examination.

Further, as to the nexus, the Board finds that the consistent lay statements and testimony constitute competent and credible evidence that his right ankle symptoms began during service and have been recurrent since that time, and such claims are reflected in the Veteran's STRs. See Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465 (1994); Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2007). The Board notes that the Veteran's reports are consistent with the circumstances of his service.? 38?U.S.C. §?1154; 38?C.F.R. §?3.303(a).

For the above reasons, the evidence, both lay and medical, supports the Veteran's account that his right ankle disability had its onset during service. See Flynn v. Brown, 6?Vet. App.?500, 503 (1994) (noting that "the element of cause and effect has been totally by-passed in favor of a simple temporal relationship between the incurrence of the disability and the period of active duty"); see also 38?C.F.R. §?3.303(a) (Service connection connotes many factors but basically it means that the facts, shown by evidence, establish that a particular injury or disease resulting in disability was incurred coincident with service in the Armed Forces).??????

In light of the foregoing, and after resolving doubt in the Veteran's favor, the Board finds that service connection for right ankle disability, diagnosed as right ankle sprain, is warranted. See Lynch v. McDonough, 21 F.4th 776 (Fed. Cir. 2021) (en banc).

STEVEN D. REISS

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board S. Nettles, Associate Counsel

The Board's decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.

Analyze in VA Law Explorer