Citation Nr: 18153982 Decision Date: 11/29/18 Archive Date: 11/28/18 DOCKET NO. 07-05 321 DATE: November 29, 2018 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for a right wrist disability is granted. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran’s right wrist disability had its onset in and is related to service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for a right wrist disability have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1111, 5107(b) (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§3.102, 3.303 (a) (2017). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Air Force from October 1970 through April 1974. The case was most recently decided by the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) in May 2018 and the Veteran appealed. This matter was previously vacated and remanded from the United States Court of Appeals for Veteran’s Claims (Court) in November 2014. The Veteran seeks service connection for his right wrist disability for which he contends began in service and has been recurrent since that time. To that end, service connection may be granted for a disability resulting in a disease or injury that is incurred in or aggravated by active duty military service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110 (2012); 38 C.F.R § 3.303 (2017). Service connection may be established by credible lay evidence and medical evidence provided by the Veteran or otherwise. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131 (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (2017). To establish service connection for a claimed disorder, the following criteria must be met: (1) medical evidence of a current disability; (2) evidence of an in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) evidence of a nexus between the claimed in-service disease or injury and current disability. See 38 U.S.C. § 3.303 (2017); see also, Davidson v. Shinseki, 581 F.3d 1313, 1316 (Fed. Cir. 2009); Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1166-67 (Fed. Cir. 2004); Hickson v. West, 12 Vet. App. 247, 253 (1999). The Board finds that the Veteran has a current diagnosis, thus establishing the first element for service connection. According to an October 2018 VA examination, the Veteran is currently diagnosed with osteoarthritis of the first carpal metacarpal joint of the right wrist, with a prior surgically removed ganglion cyst. The Veteran is right hand dominant and complains of constant chronic pain and difficulty with use. See VA Examination Report, The Board also finds that the evidence shows that the Veteran experienced an in-service incurrence of his right wrist disability. The Veteran has consistently reported that he developed pain and swelling in his right wrist after sustaining an injury during a tackle football game while in service. See Veteran’s Statement, January 2007; Statement in Support of Claim (no date provided); VA Examination Report, October 2018. The Board finds that the Veteran is competent and credible to report the symptoms he recalls experiencing while in service and to provide lay testimony concerning his recollection of having the ganglion cyst removed. See Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2007); see also, Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465 (1994). The Veteran’s statements are consistent with the evidence of record. Thus, the Board finds that this evidence demonstrates that the Veteran experienced an in-service incurrence of his right wrist disability and the second element for service connection is established. The Board finds probative the competent and credible lay statements linking the Veteran’s right wrist disability to service. The Veteran provided numerous lay statements from various witnesses who recalled the Veteran’s right wrist disability and who were also able to state that the Veteran was injured during a football game while in service. See Various Lay Statements, January 2007, September 2011, January 2016, May 2016, March 2018. The Veteran’s spouse indicated that when she met him in 1984, she witnessed his right wrist pain. See May 2016 statement. Further, the Veteran’s previous employer also submitted a January 2007 statement indicating that he knew the Veteran for over 30 years and that during his employment, he was aware of pain in the Veteran’s right wrist. The employer also indicated that he found him to be forthright, and continued to employ him in various capacities up to 1990, testifying to his good character. See January 2007 statement. Additionally, the Veteran’s brother-in-law recalled that in having lived with the Veteran one year after leaving service in 1974, the Veteran exhibited pain in his right wrist and hand. See May 2016 statement. The Veteran’s stepson knew the Veteran to have pain in his wrist after leaving service and also recalled that he was unable to participate in his sporting events when he was growing up due to his right wrist disability. See March 2018. The Board finds that these statements are credible as they have been provided by competent sources with personal knowledge of the Veteran’s symptomatology as it relates to his right wrist disability, and are consistent with other evidence of record. See Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2007); see also, Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465 (1994). The Board finds such testimonies highly probative. Additionally, during an independent medical examination, the Veteran’s physician opined that the Veteran’s right wrist disability originated from the in-service sporting injuries and that his right wrist disability was at least as likely as not caused by his in-service injury. See Medical Treatment Record, January 2016. The Board finds that this evidence, along with the aforementioned lay statements, supports a finding that the Veteran’s current right wrist disability is linked to the in-service incurrence. The Board notes that the February 2016 and October 2018 VA examiners opined that the Veteran’s current right wrist disability loss was not related to service; however, because the evidence shows that the Veteran’s right wrist disability had its onset in service, service connection is warranted. See Flynn v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 500, 503 (1994). In sum, based on all the evidence, both medical and lay, the Board finds that the competent and credible reports of continuous right wrist pain and weakness since service separation are sufficient to place in equipoise the question of whether the symptoms of a right wrist disability have been recurrent since service. Thus, resolving all reasonable doubt in the Veteran’s favor, the Board finds that service connection is warranted for the Veteran’s right wrist disability. STEVEN D. REISS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD T. Jones, Associate Counsel