The basis of disability evaluations is the ability of the body as a whole, or of the psyche, or of a system or organ of the body to function under the ordinary conditions of daily life including employment. Whether the upper or lower extremities, the back or abdominal wall, the eyes or ears, or the cardiovascular, digestive, or other system, or psyche are affected, evaluations are based upon lack of usefulness, of these parts or systems, especially in self-support. This imposes upon the medical examiner the responsibility of furnishing, in addition to the etiological, anatomical, pathological, laboratory and prognostic data required for ordinary medical classification, full description of the effects of disability upon the person's ordinary activity. In this connection, it will be remembered that a person may be too disabled to engage in employment although he or she is up and about and fairly comfortable at home or upon limited activity.
[91 FR 9712, Feb. 27, 2026]
Notes of Decisions
Angel Vazquez -Flores v. James B. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 37 (Vet. App. 2008).
· cites it 6× “§ 7104 (d)(1); 38 C.F.R. § 4.10 (2007) (basis of disability evaluations is ability to function under ordinary conditions of daily life, including employment); Moore v.”
Jimmy H. Floore v. Eric K. Shinseki, 26 Vet. App. 376 (Vet. App. 2013).
· cites it 6× “The Court remanded the matter for the Board to obtain the missing records and a new medical examination report that was based on a review of all past medical records, instructing that the examination "be conducted so as to assist the [regional office] and the [Board] to address…”
Saunders v. Wilkie, 886 F.3d 1356 (Fed. Cir. 2018).
· cites it 2× “" 38 C.F.R. § 4.10 ("Functional impairment") (emphasis added).”
Dwayne A. Moore v. R. James Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 211 (Vet. App. 2007).
· cites it 4× “38 C.F.R. § 4.10 (2006). In addition, "[f]or the application of this schedule, accurate and fully descriptive medical examinations are required, with emphasis upon the limitation of activity imposed by the disabling condition.”
Billy D. McCarroll v. Robert A. McDonald, 28 Vet. App. 267 (Vet. App. 2016).
· cites it 4× “2 (2016) (noting that it is crucial for the rating to "accurately reflect the elements of disability present"); 38 C.F.R. § 4.10 (2016) ("The basis of disability evaluations is the ability of .”
Schafrath v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 589 (Vet. App. 1991).
· cites it 2× “42 (“[w]hen complete examinations are not conducted covering all systems of the body affected by disease or injury, it is impossible to visualize the nature and extent of the service connected disability”) (1991).”
DeLuca v. Brown, 8 Vet. App. 202 (Vet. App. 1995).
· cites it 2× “125, 129 (1994) (medical examiner must “furnish[ ], in addition to the etiological, anatomical, pathological, laboratory[,] and prognostic data required for ordinary medical classification, full description of the effects of disability upon the person’s ordinary activity”)…”
Vazquez-Flores v. Shinseki, 580 F.3d 1270 (Fed. Cir. 2009).
· cites it 2× “The veterans counter by pointing out that the VA’s regulations explicitly reference “daily life” — 38 C.F.R. § 4.10 states that “[t]he basis of disability evaluations is the ability of the body as a whole .”
Randy L. Pederson v. Robert A. McDonald, 27 Vet. App. 276 (Vet. App. 2015).
· cites it 2× “As the Court recently explained, it is the rating official who is responsible for "interpret[ing] reports of examination in the light of the whole recorded history, reconciling the various reports into a consistent picture so that the current rating may accurately reflect the…”
Goodman v. Shulkin, 870 F.3d 1383 (Fed. Cir. 2017).
“See 38 C.F.R. § 4.10 ; see also J.A. 90-91. The Board was authorized to review the 2014 Medical Opinion and weigh it against the other evidence of record.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.