Esteban v. Brown
1994 U.S. Vet. App. LEXIS 134, 1994 WL 58226, 6 Vet. App. 259 (1994)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Under the Veterans Administration's anti-pyramiding regulation (38 C.F.R. § 4.14), separate disability ratings are permissible for conditions stemming from the same injury if their symptomatology is distinct and non-overlapping, rather than constituting the 'same disability' or 'same manifestation.'
Facts:
- Leonardo A. Esteban served on active duty from July 1946 to April 1949, including service in Japan during World War II.
- In January 1949, while in Okinawa, Esteban sustained an injury to the right side of his face in a motor vehicle accident and was hospitalized until March 1949.
- An October 1977 VA disability examination revealed Esteban had a fractured bone on the right side of his face with four scars (on the temple, cheekbone, and near the mouth) and slight to moderate disfigurement, injury to facial muscles, and pain.
- In July 1988, Dr. Corsino B. Torno, Esteban's private physician, issued a medical certificate stating Esteban had paralysis on the right side of his face.
- In June 1991, Dr. Torno issued another medical certificate indicating Esteban had impaired sensation in the right side of his face and disfiguring scars.
- A September 1991 VA disability examination report noted Esteban had four scars, muscle injury, difficulty in mastication, slight disfigurement, and continued complaints of pain on the right side of his face.
Procedural Posture:
- After an October 1977 VA disability examination, Leonardo A. Esteban was granted service connection under 38 C.F.R. § 4.118, Diagnostic Code (DC) 7800 (disfiguring scars), and was rated at 10% disabling.
- On June 2, 1989, the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (BVA) denied an increase in Esteban's 10% rating for disfiguring facial scars.
- On October 31, 1991, the Regional Office (RO) confirmed its rating decision and denied an increase in the 10% rating under DC 7800.
- Esteban appealed the RO decision to the BVA in February 1992.
- On April 29, 1992, the BVA again denied an increase in the 10% rating under DC 7800, concluding that while Esteban could be rated under DC 7800 (disfigurement), DC 7800 (tender and painful scars, likely a typo for 7804), or DC 5325 (facial muscle injury), he could only receive one rating due to the anti-pyramiding rule.
- Esteban appealed the BVA's April 29, 1992, decision to the U.S. Court of Veterans Appeals (Court).
- The Court initially issued a decision on October 5, 1993, denying relief.
- Esteban filed a motion for panel review of the Court's October 5, 1993, decision.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the Veterans Administration's anti-pyramiding regulation (38 C.F.R. § 4.14) preclude separate disability ratings for distinct symptoms—specifically disfigurement, painful scars, and facial muscle damage affecting mastication—all stemming from a single facial injury, when the symptomatology for each condition is not duplicative or overlapping?
Opinions:
Majority - Kramer, Judge
Yes, the Veterans Administration's anti-pyramiding regulation does not preclude separate disability ratings for distinct symptoms like disfigurement, painful scars, and facial muscle damage affecting mastication, even when they stem from a single injury, as long as their symptomatology is not duplicative or overlapping. Under 38 C.F.R. § 4.25, all disabilities are generally rated separately unless they fall under the anti-pyramiding prohibition of 38 C.F.R. § 4.14, which targets the 'same disability' or 'same manifestation.' The Board of Veterans’ Appeals (BVA) had recognized that Esteban had three distinct conditions—disfiguring scars (Diagnostic Code 7800), painful scars (impliedly DC 7804), and facial muscle damage affecting mastication (DC 5325)—each potentially warranting a 10% rating. However, the BVA erroneously refused to grant separate ratings, concluding that doing so would constitute impermissible pyramiding. The Court clarified that the anti-pyramiding rule aims to prevent compensating a claimant twice for the same symptomatology, not for multiple distinct impairments arising from a single cause. The Court found that Esteban’s symptomatology for disfigurement (purely cosmetic), painful scars (sensory impairment), and facial muscle damage (functional impairment of mastication) were distinct and separate, with no duplication or overlap. Therefore, Esteban was entitled to combine his separate 10% ratings for each distinct condition, totaling a 30% rating.
Analysis:
This case significantly clarifies the application of the VA's anti-pyramiding rule (38 C.F.R. § 4.14) in disability ratings, particularly for injuries resulting in multiple distinct impairments. It establishes that multiple ratings are permissible for different conditions arising from a single injury, provided their symptomatology is truly distinct and not duplicative or overlapping. This prevents the VA from unfairly limiting compensation when a single injury leads to multiple, independent forms of impairment, and reinforces the principle of separate rating unless symptoms demonstrably overlap. The decision ensures veterans receive adequate compensation for all their service-connected disabilities, even when originating from a common cause, and will serve as important precedent for distinguishing between 'same disability'/'same manifestation' and multiple distinct disabilities.
