Key Legal Authorities
Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990)
| Case | Holding |
|---|---|
| Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990) | Benefit of the doubt — when evidence is in approximate balance, resolve in veteran's favor |
| Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163 (Fed. Cir. 2004) | Three-element test for direct service connection |
| McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79 (2006) | Low threshold for when VA must provide medical examination |
| Nieves-Rodriguez v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 295 (2008) | Medical opinion must be based on accurate facts and sound reasoning |
| Caluza v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 498 (1995) | Three elements for well-grounded claim: current disability, in-service event, medical nexus |
| Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303 (2007) | VA must provide adequate examination or explain why not |
| Buchanan v. Nicholson, 451 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2006) | Lay evidence is competent to establish symptoms experienced |
| Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2007) | Lay persons can provide nexus evidence for conditions observable by five senses |