Citation Nr: 25009235 Decision Date: 07/15/25 Archive Date: 07/15/25 DOCKET NO. 20-22 194 DATE: July 15, 2025 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for shin splints is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active service from May 1987 to May 1990. These matters are on appeal from a November 2018 rating decision by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) regional office (RO). The Veteran had a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) in December 2021. A transcript has been associated with the record. This matter was before the Board and was denied in an April 2024 decision based in part on the fact that the Veteran did not have a currently diagnosed shin splint disability. The Board also indicated that while the Veteran's service treatment records (STRs) show he was seen once in August 1989 for shin splints, this was the only mention made and a subsequent April 1990 separation examination, no ongoing shin splints were noted. Additionally, the Board found there was no competent objective evidence indicating a link between any diagnosed shin splints with the Veteran's time in service. The Veteran appealed the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims ("the Court"). In a February 2025 Joint Motion for Partial Remand (JMPR), the court vacated the April 2024 Board decision as it pertained to this matter and remanded for further adjudication. Specifically, the Court said the Board didn't address material evidence as to whether the record reasonably raised a claim of shin splints secondary to the Veteran's ankle disability. The Board denied the Veteran's claim based on a lack of a disability. However, in an August 2020 private knee and lower leg examination, there is a diagnosis of shin splints and indicated the Veteran's shin splints contributed to pain with prolonged ambulation. A November 2018 examiner indicated the Veteran underwent physical therapy for "shin splints - he went to PT for ankle. After it healed and got back into running, he started to have pain in his shin area." A May 2019 private examiner indicated the Veteran had a history of shin splints and related his ankle injury and residual loss of motion. As a matter of clarification of the evidence cited above by the Court, the May 2019 examiner stated in full that while the Veteran described a history of shin splints, "there is no record of it while on active duty. To say that this history of shin splints is related to his ankle injury and residual loss of motion would be conjecture on my part." There is a question as to whether the Veteran has diagnosed shin splints. In several examinations, in particular, some where there is a specific question about whether the Veteran has shin splints, examiners have indicated the Veteran does not have a diagnosed shin splint condition. (See e.g. July 2010 treatment records, August 2018 ankle and knee examinations, November 2024 ankle and knee examinations.) However, there are some other records that indicate the Veteran does have shin splints, some of which are based on the Veteran's subjective reports. (See e.g. July 2009, December 2018, May 2019 treatment records.) In an August 2020 examination, the examiner indicated a diagnosis of shin splint with a date of diagnosis in August 1989. The examiner indicated the Veteran's claims file was reviewed. The examiner noted the Veteran reported pain in his knees and chronic shin splints. The Veteran had a history of recurrent knee and ankle injuries first documented in 1989 with additional history of shin splints as well. The injuries continued and pain increased with corrective surgery completed in November 2019 but the Veteran continued to have pain and decreased function. Therefore, on remand, an examination is warranted in order to determine whether the Veteran has a diagnosed shin splint disability and if so, whether it is was incurred in or due to his time in service or proximately due to any of his service connected disabilities. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain and associate with the record any outstanding medical treatment records. The Veteran is invited to submit any outstanding records himself. 2. Schedule the Veteran for an examination for his 1) bilateral shin splints. The examiner should opine as to the following: (a) Does the Veteran have a diagnosed bilateral shin splint disability? If not, the examiner is asked to address the positive evidence in the file indicating such a diagnosis. (b) Whether it is at least as likely as not the Veteran's disability was incurred in or due to his time in service? (c) Whether it is at least as likely as not the Veteran's disability is proximately due to any of his service connected disabilities. (d) Whether it is at least as likely as not the Veteran's disability was aggravated by any of his service connected disabilities. NOTE: Aggravation in this context does not mean a permanent worsening. Any incremental or temporary worsening constitutes aggravation. *The examiner must consider and take into account the Veteran's lay statements about what happened to him while in service and his current symptoms. *The examiner may not rely solely on a lack of treatment as a reason for a negative etiology opinion. 3. Readjudicate the Veteran's claim on remand. John J. Crowley Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board A. Snoparsky, 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.