Citation Nr: 22015896 Decision Date: 03/20/22 Archive Date: 03/20/22 DOCKET NO. 17-53 862 DATE: March 20, 2022 ORDER Service connection for anxiety disorder is granted. FINDING OF FACT Resolving reasonable doubt in the Veteran's favor, his anxiety disorder is at least as likely as not related to an in-service motor vehicle accident. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for anxiety disorder are met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served honorably on active duty in the United States Army from July 1980 to August 1983. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a March 2017 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In December 2019, the Board remanded this matter for further development. Anxiety Disorder Service connection may be granted for a disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. § 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. To establish service connection for a 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. Davidson v. Shinseki, 581 F.3d 1313 (Fed. Cir. 2009). The Veteran contends that his anxiety disorder is related to an in-service motor vehicle accident. For the following reasons, the Board agrees. The Veteran has a current diagnosis of generalized anxiety disorder. The Veteran has reported that during service he was in a motor vehicle accident that he associates with his anxiety disorder. The claims file includes an accident report from September 1982 that states the Veteran was the passenger in a vehicle that was hit from behind on the highway. The accident report notes that the damage to the Veteran's vehicle was total. The Board finds this to satisfy the first two elements of service connection. Turning to the third element, medical nexus, the evidence consists of a VA examination and a letter from the Veteran's VA treating psychiatrist. In February 2017, the Veteran underwent a VA examination for his claim. The examiner found the Veteran to not have a mental health condition that was incurred in or caused by an in-service motor vehicle accident. The examiner's rationale was that the Veteran was not a good historian in that over the years he has provided contradictory information when compared to the totality of his treatment records. The examiner noted the Veteran has associated his mental health symptoms to multiple causes and it was recently when he started to associate them with a motor vehicle accident. In contrast, the Veteran submitted a January 2017 letter from his VA treating psychiatrist. The psychiatrist found it more likely than not that the Veteran's anxiety disorder emerged from an in-service motor vehicle accident. The psychiatrist based their opinion on the Veteran's self-report of symptoms and treatment history. The Board finds there to be an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence that the Veteran's current anxiety disorder is related to an in-service motor vehicle accident. If there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence, reasonable doubt is resolved in the Veteran's favor. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. Accordingly, service connection for an anxiety disorder is granted. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. JOHN Z. JONES Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Michael Chandeck, Associate 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.