Veterans Law Judge
Judge Kristin Haddock: BVA decisions and outcomes
From 2017 to 2026, Veterans Law Judge Kristin Haddock signed 8,606 Board decisions covering 16,869 condition issues. The judge granted 20.9% of those issues, denied 27.0% and remanded 49.0%. For the same mix of conditions, the rest of the Board granted 19.3% and remanded 48.3%, so this judge's grant rate is close to the Board's and the remand rate is close to it.
Decisions
8,606
2017–2026
Issues decided
16,869
One issue per condition per decision
Issues granted
20.9%
Board, same conditions: 19.3%
Issues remanded
49.0%
Board, same conditions: 48.3%
Judges do not choose their cases, and grant rates differ a lot by condition. “Board, same conditions” is what the rest of the Board decided for the same mix of conditions, so the comparison is fair to the judge's docket. This is not a ranking.
Conditions this judge decided most
Each row compares the judge's issues on one condition with the rest of the Board's issues on the same condition. Conditions with fewer than 20 of this judge's issues are left out, because a few decisions can swing the rate.
| Condition | Issues | Granted | Board granted | Remanded | Board remanded |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Knee impairment | 1,305 | 17.5% | 17.3% | 54.9% | 51.1% |
| Hearing loss | 938 | 35.1% | 19.3% | 23.7% | 34.7% |
| Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) | 793 | 27.7% | 28.9% | 42.6% | 38.1% |
| Tinnitus | 654 | 52.6% | 39.5% | 15.7% | 22.8% |
| Sleep apnea syndromes (obstructive central mixed) | 577 | 36.6% | 26.1% | 44.5% | 50.4% |
| Intervertebral disc syndrome | 503 | 21.5% | 18.6% | 49.1% | 48.0% |
| Hypertension | 502 | 23.1% | 17.1% | 46.2% | 48.8% |
| Degenerative arthritis of the spine (spondylosis) | 482 | 24.9% | 20.6% | 44.2% | 46.1% |
| Shoulder impairment | 395 | 12.2% | 14.3% | 57.0% | 53.0% |
| Hip impairment | 362 | 11.9% | 14.4% | 57.5% | 53.8% |
| Migraine | 361 | 26.0% | 30.2% | 45.2% | 42.1% |
| Peripheral nerve disorders | 320 | 20.3% | 20.5% | 52.2% | 51.7% |
| Diabetes mellitus | 317 | 20.8% | 20.0% | 36.6% | 40.1% |
| Ankle impairment | 312 | 15.1% | 16.9% | 52.9% | 50.4% |
| Major depressive disorder | 235 | 31.1% | 34.6% | 36.6% | 34.2% |
Judge Kristin Haddock's decisions by year
| Year | Decisions | Granted | Denied | Remanded |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | 562 | 23.3% | 34.7% | 52.5% |
| 2018 | 1,110 | 34.0% | 36.1% | 56.6% |
| 2019 | 1,148 | 33.1% | 36.4% | 54.4% |
| 2020 | 965 | 36.4% | 41.3% | 46.6% |
| 2021 | 880 | 32.7% | 37.3% | 47.0% |
| 2022 | 873 | 38.1% | 32.2% | 51.4% |
| 2023 | 872 | 37.2% | 32.9% | 50.1% |
| 2024 | 789 | 35.9% | 28.1% | 49.9% |
| 2025 | 1,019 | 35.6% | 36.5% | 49.4% |
| 2026 | 388 | 36.1% | 28.9% | 46.6% |
Why the Board granted or denied issues in Judge Kristin Haddock's decisions
Most common reasons in grants
- In-service noise exposure conceded188
- Current diagnosis established132
- Service connection established60
- Caused by the service-connected disability42
- Service records negative or silent29
- Inadequate VA medical opinion27
- New and material evidence submitted25
- Inadequate VA opinion21
Most common reasons in denials
- Service records negative or silent192
- Preponderance of the evidence against the claim190
- VA examiner: less likely than not related to service184
- No in-service complaints, treatment or diagnosis142
- No current diagnosis131
- Current diagnosis established71
- Already at the maximum schedular rating56
- Evidence weighs against the claim23
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 Judge Kristin Haddock decisions
Granted
Veteran met schedular criteria for TDIU (combined rating of at least 70%, with one disability rated 40% or more).; Evidence indicated combined disabilities (PTSD, left clavicle, shoulder/hand pain, hearing loss, hypertension) impacted ability to work.; Board found evidence in approximate balance and resolved doubt in Veteran's favor.
Veteran's IBS with chronic diarrhea and colon polyps more nearly approximated severe IBS with diarrhea or alternating diarrhea and constipation, with more or less constant abdominal distress.; 30 percent rating is the maximum allowable schedular rating for IBS.; No indication colon polyps caused additional symptoms warranting higher rating.
Evidence from August 2, 2023, showed social and occupational impairment due to PTSD symptoms.; Symptoms included difficulty adapting to stressful circumstances, persistent negative emotional state, and clinically significant distress.; The Board found that the Veteran's PTSD symptoms more closely approximated a 70 percent disability rating on August 2, 2023.
Denied
No new and relevant evidence received; 38 U.S.C. § 5108; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.156(d), 3.2501
Service treatment records showed normal hearing at enlistment and separation.; Earliest audiological evidence of hearing loss appeared many years after service.; VA examiners opined hearing loss was less likely than not related to military noise exposure.; No objective evidence of acoustic trauma from military noise exposure.; Veteran's assertions of in-service onset and worsening hearing loss were inconsistent with medical records and not credible.
Audiometric testing results indicated Level I in the right ear and Level II in the left ear.; These results fall within the criteria for a noncompensable rating.; Veteran's lay testimony was less probative than objective audiology studies.
Research your Judge Kristin Haddock case
Narrow by year, judge, evidence or secondary condition, read the decisions, and export a research memo.
How these numbers are calculated
- Issue rates count each condition the Board decided in a decision once, by the outcome of that issue. A decision can grant one issue and deny another.
- The yearly table counts decisions: a decision with a granted issue and a denied issue appears in both columns, so a row can add up to more than 100%.
- "Board, same conditions" weights the rest of the Board's grant and remand rate for each condition by how many of this judge's issues were on that condition. It does not adjust for evidence, hearing type or representation.
- Judges are identified from the signature on each decision. This page is a statistical summary, not an evaluation of any judge.
- The data comes from CaseScribe's AI extraction of public BVA decisions (2017–2026) and can contain errors. It is updated automatically as new decisions are added.