BVA decisions by condition

Epilepsy grand mal: BVA grant rates and what wins

From 2018 to 2026, the Board of Veterans' Appeals decided a epilepsy grand mal issue in 1,331 decisions. It granted the epilepsy grand mal issue in 12.2% of them, below the 19.9% grant rate for all conditions, denied it in 24.6%, and remanded it in 61.7%. Counting only decisions on the merits (granted or denied), 33.3% were granted.

Decisions

1,331

2018–2026

Granted

12.2%

All conditions: 19.9%

Granted on the merits

33.3%

Granted ÷ (granted + denied)

Remanded

61.7%

Denied: 24.6%

Epilepsy grand mal outcomes by year

YearDecisionsGrantedDeniedRemanded
2018
186
9.7%30.6%58.1%
2019
210
11.4%24.8%60.5%
2020
132
9.1%18.2%72.7%
2021
167
12.6%25.7%60.5%
2022
163
10.4%21.5%65.6%
2023
161
9.9%29.8%60.2%
2024
159
15.7%18.9%64.8%
2025
107
19.6%25.2%53.3%

Evidence in granted and denied epilepsy grand mal decisions

For each kind of supporting evidence: how often the Board granted the epilepsy grand mal issue on the merits when the decision mentioned it, compared with decisions that did not. These are associations, not causes, and evidence is recorded per decision, not per issue.

In the recordDecisionsGranted when presentWhen absentDifference
Positive nexus opinion16872.1%22.8%+49.3 pts
Favorable VA exam14466.3%25.9%+40.4 pts
Treating physician opinion5566.7%31.3%+35.3 pts
Combat service5762.5%31.8%+30.7 pts
Claimed as secondary38354.5%27.1%+27.4 pts
Private medical opinion34747.6%25.9%+21.7 pts
Lay statement99130.2%47.7%−17.5 pts
  • The Board applied the benefit-of-the-doubt rule (38 CFR 3.102) in 72.4% of the decisions that granted epilepsy grand mal.
  • The Board found the veteran's statements credible in 31.9% of grants and 10.1% of denials.

Negative evidence in the record

An unfavorable exam or a negative nexus opinion often sits in the same record as favorable evidence, and the Board weighs them against each other. So these rows show how often epilepsy grand mal was still granted when the record contained the negative item, not that the item helped.

In the recordDecisionsGranted when presentWhen absentDifference
Negative nexus opinion59430.9%35.9%−5.0 pts
Unfavorable VA exam82431.5%38.4%−6.9 pts

Why the Board granted or denied epilepsy grand mal

Most common reasons in grants

  1. Current diagnosis established17
  2. Caused by the service-connected disability9
  3. VA examiner: less likely than not related to service4
  4. Service connection established4
  5. Criteria for secondary service connection met3
  6. No contrary evidence2
  7. Seizure disorder diagnosed2
  8. Severance of service connection was improper2

Most common reasons in denials

  1. No current diagnosis38
  2. VA examiner: less likely than not related to service30
  3. No in-service complaints, treatment or diagnosis28
  4. Preponderance of the evidence against the claim27
  5. Current diagnosis established19
  6. Service records negative or silent17
  7. No continuity of symptomatology6
  8. No nexus to service4

Numbers are decisions that gave the reason. Reasons are short phrases extracted by AI from each decision; common wordings of the same reason are grouped. Benefit of the doubt is reported above.

Recent epilepsy grand mal decisions

Granted

Citation Nr. A26039497Timothy Cothrel · 2026

VA C&P exam found seizures at least as likely as not related to service-connected scarring; Board applied "but-for" causation standard; Benefit-of-the-doubt doctrine applied due to approximately balanced evidence

Citation Nr. 26003739Nathaniel Doan · 2026

Resolving doubt in Veteran's favor; At least one major seizure monthly over the last year; Met criteria for 100% rating

Citation Nr. A26023842B.T. Knope · 2026

Service-connected anxiety disorder; Substance abuse as intermediate step; Seizures due to substance abuse

Denied

Citation Nr. A26038465Christopher A. Wendell · 2026

Current diagnosis conceded; Persian Gulf service satisfies second element; VA examiner opined less likely than not related to service

Citation Nr. A26037945John J. Crowley · 2026

No history of major seizures or frequent minor seizures; Syncope did not require continuous medication; Evidence weighed against higher rating

Citation Nr. A26035481Laura E. Collins · 2026

No competent evidence of current seizure disorder; Diagnoses and seizures during service are too remote; Veteran not competent to diagnose current seizure disorder; Evidence weighs against finding a current seizure disorder

Rules that apply to epilepsy grand mal claims

Research your epilepsy grand mal case

Narrow by year, judge, evidence or secondary condition, read the decisions, and export a research memo.

Open VA Law Explorer

How these numbers are calculated

  • Rates count decisions in which the Board decided a epilepsy grand mal issue, by the outcome of that issue. Other issues in the same decision can have different outcomes.
  • “Granted on the merits” leaves out remands and dismissals. “All conditions” is the grant share across every condition issue in the data.
  • The data comes from CaseScribe's AI extraction of public BVA decisions (2018–2026) and can contain errors. It is updated automatically as new decisions are added.