Bva Case Cites Cavc

[Berta]

This might help someone out there-

from:http://www.va.gov/vetapp06/files4/0620890.txt

The veteran had 2 opinions from the same VA examiner that were conflicting,(figure that?) and a third VA opinion that supported the claim. Still this claim ended up at the board-even though the RO could have made a proper decision.

The BVA referenced 3 CAVC decisions thus:

"An evaluation of the probative value of medical opinion

evidence is based on the medical expert's personal

examination of the patient, the examiner's knowledge and

skill in analyzing the data, and the medical conclusion

reached. The credibility and weight to be attached to such

opinions are within the province of the Board as

adjudicators. Guerrieri v. Brown, 4 Vet. App. 467, 470-71

(1993)."

"Greater weight may be placed on one physician's opinion over

another depending on factors such as reasoning employed by

the physicians and whether or not and the extent to which

they reviewed prior clinical records and other evidence.

Gabrielson v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 36, 40 (1994)."

" The

probative value of a medical opinion is generally based on

the scope of the examination or review, as well as the

relative merits of the expert's qualifications and analytical

findings, and the probative weight of a medical opinion may

be reduced if the examiner fails to explain the basis for an

opinion. See Sklar v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 140 (1993). "

This all shows what a good IMO should contain too-

Personal examination if possible,

medical knowledge and skill to render the opinion,

conclusion,

full review of medical records and other evidence,

qualifications of the physician and

the basis (rationale) for the opinion.

Although this claim was remanded for two disabilities, the disability the veteran claimed that these statements were used for -was granted.

If you pay an IMO doctor real cash money- and they are not familiar with the VA criteria-

you have every right to present to them a format that the VA will accept.

This case above was not a question of a nexus factor but an IMO should use the nexus factor even if it is obvious. Somewhere at hadit is the more than likely, as likely as not etc stuff that the VA also wants to see stated in a medical opinion.

Dr. Bash referenced the actual IOM report on Agent Orange in my IMO although the VA had already conceded exposure. The nexus factor was not in question but he made sure he stated it anyhow.

Edited November 30, 2006 by Berta (see edit history)