Citation Nr: 21003474 Decision Date: 01/21/21 Archive Date: 01/21/21 DOCKET NO. 16-40 787 DATE: January 21, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for chronic undifferentiated schizophrenia, major depression, and psychosis is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty with the United States Army from June 1980 to October 1980. In a September 2019 decision, the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) denied the appeal for service connection of chronic undifferentiated schizophrenia, major depression, and psychosis. The Veteran appealed the Board’s decision to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In April 2020, the Court granted a Joint Motion for Partial Remand (JMPR) vacating and remanding the September 2019 Board decision related to service connection for chronic undifferentiated schizophrenia, major depression, and psychosis. 1. Entitlement to service connection for chronic undifferentiated schizophrenia, major depression, and psychosis is remanded. The April 2020 JMPR found in part that the Board erred when it failed to ensure that VA complied with the duty to assist when it relied on an examination that was inadequate for rating purposes. To be adequate, a medical opinion must support its conclusion with an analysis that the Board can consider and weigh against contrary opinions. Nieves-Rodriguez v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 295, 301 (2008); Stefl v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 120, 124-25 (2007). It must be “based upon consideration of the veteran’s prior medical history and examinations and also describe [ ] the disability in sufficient detail so that the Board’s evaluation of the claimed disability will be a fully informed one.” D’Aries v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 97, 104 (2008). In granting the JMPR, the Court agreed that the April 2019 VA medical opinion is inadequate for rating purposes. The VA medical opinion has been found to be based on an inaccurate factual premise; primarily the examiner’s statement that the Veteran’s schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders developed 11 years after military service despite evidence of record showing an earlier diagnosis. The JMPR references a June 1987 medical record that notes the Veteran was hospitalized for a psychotic disorder at the age of 22. The 1987 record diagnosed the Veteran with acute exacerbation of chronic schizophrenia. Review of the record shows that medical treatment records received January 16, 1992 include records that show the Veteran was treated for psychosis in September 1982. A treatment report from August 1985 indicates the Veteran has a long history of paranoid schizophrenia with multiple hospitalizations. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain an addendum opinion from the April 2019 clinician or from an appropriate clinician if the April 2019 clinician is unavailable. If necessary, request an in-person examination with the addendum opinion. The examiner is asked to opine whether the Veteran’s undifferentiated schizophrenia, major depression, and psychosis at least as likely as not had its onset in service or is otherwise related to the Veteran’s service, to include reported in-service event to include mistreatment by drill sergeant? Is it at least as likely as not that the diagnosed schizophrenia manifested within one year after discharge from active service in October 1980 or that symptoms of schizophrenia have been continuous since service. In rendering the opinion the examiner should address the following: A June 1987 medical record that notes the Veteran was hospitalized for a psychotic disorder at the age of 22. The 1987 record diagnosed the Veteran with acute exacerbation of chronic schizophrenia. Medical treatment records received January 16, 1992 which include records that show that the Veteran was treated for psychosis in September 1982 and a treatment report from August 1985 which indicates the Veteran has a long history of paranoid schizophrenia with multiple hospitalizations. (Continued on the next page)   Any opinion offered should be accompanied by underlying reasons for the conclusions. The examiner must provide a rationale for the opinion provided and reconcile any opinion with the evidence of record to include the 1980s psychosis treatment of record. Complete rationale should include an explanation of the evidence used to support the opinion, as well as an explanation as to why the evidence supports the conclusion. K. J. ALIBRANDO Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board M. Lang, Attorney Advisor The Board’s decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.