Citation Nr: 21013838 Decision Date: 03/10/21 Archive Date: 03/10/21 DOCKET NO. 10-45 538 DATE: March 10, 2021 ORDER Service connection for schizophrenia is granted. FINDING OF FACT The preponderance of the evidence is not against the claim of service connection for schizophrenia. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for schizophrenia are met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from May 1971 to May 1982. The Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans’ Law Judge in March 2013. This case has a long procedural history, which includes prior Board remands, a March 2020 denial, and an October 2020 Order from the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) granting a Joint Motion of Partial Remand (JMR) which vacated the Board’s decision and returned the case to the Board for further appellate review. Service Connection Service connection may be granted for a disability resulting from a disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. See 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). To establish a right to compensation for a present disability, a Veteran must show: (1) the existence of a present disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the present disability and the disease or injury incurred or aggravated during service"-the so-called "nexus" requirement. Holton v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1362, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2010). When a chronic disease is shown in service sufficient to permit a finding of service connection, subsequent manifestations of the same chronic disease at any later date are service connected, unless clearly attributable to intercurrent causes. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(b). For the showing of chronic disease in service there is required a combination of manifestations sufficient to identify the disease entity, and sufficient observation to establish chronicity at the time. When the disease identity is established (leprosy, tuberculosis, multiple sclerosis, etc.), there is no requirement of evidentiary showing of continuity. For this purpose, a chronic disease is one listed at 38 C.F.R. § 3.309 (a). See Walker v. Shinseki, 708 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2013). Schizophrenia is a type of psychoses that qualifies as a chronic condition under 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(a). The Board is reminded that to deny a claim on its merits, the preponderance of the evidence must be against the claim. Alemany v. Brown, 9 Vet. App. 519 (1996). Schizophrenia In this matter, the Veteran’s diagnosis of schizophrenia is not in question. The issue presented to the Board, and specifically raised by the JMR, is whether the evidence presented continuity of symptomology sufficient to warrant service connection. This issue is complicated by the fact that the Veteran has been an unreliable historian. The Veteran reported issues regarding his memory in a December 2005 VA medical record when he reported that his memory was not good. The Veteran has also provided conflicting statements regarding when his psychiatric symptoms began, stating in his March 2013 hearing that his hallucinations began in-service yet stating in a June 2017 VA treatment record that his hallucinations began in 2002. (Continued on the next page)   What is clear from the record is that the Veteran had unremarkable service until a February 1981 incident for which he was Court Martialed. After his discharge, the Veteran reported he was incarcerated in 1983 and from 1986 to 1997. See December 2005 VA record. Thus, medical records or other evidence which could document the Veteran’s mental status in the years immediately following his service do not exist. A February 2001 VA treatment record shows the Veteran reported impulsive behavior, poor judgment, and an inability to comply with recommended courses of action. The record does contain VA examinations which have not linked the Veteran’s schizophrenia to his active service and a December 2019 report which did find the Veteran’s schizophrenia was related to his active duty service. A December 2017 VA examiner found no proximal relationship between the Veteran’s schizophrenia and his in-service incident. When addressing the issue of continuity of symptomology, based on the Veteran’s service records, the December 2019 examiner found that it seemed likely that at least prodromal symptoms of schizophrenia may have contributed to the Veteran’s in-service disciplinary infractions. The preponderance of the evidence, then, is not against the claim and the standard for denial of the Veteran’s claim is not met. The Board is specifically reminded that seeking to obtain negative evidence against the Veteran is prohibited by VA law. See Mariano v. Principi, 17 Vet. App. 305, 312 (2003). Accordingly, the Board finds that a fair preponderance of the evidence does not weigh against the claim and, as such, service connection for schizophrenia is warranted. Brown v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 413 (1993). JOHN Z. JONES Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board A. Parrish, Counsel 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.