38 C.F.R. § 4.149
[Reserved]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases, 1995–2006 · leading case: Simington v. West, 11 Vet. App. 41 (Vet. App. 1998).
Simington v. West, 11 Vet. App. 41 (Vet. App. 1998). “The former “may be considered service-connected solely for the purpose of determining entitlement to dental examinations or outpatient dental treatment”, 38 C.F.R. § 4.149 , but the loss of teeth as described in the latter provision is rated, in accordance with the diagnostic…”
Regis J. Byrd v. R. James Nicholson, 19 Vet. App. 388 (Vet. App. 2005). “” 38 C.F.R. § 4.149 (1994). In 1997, the Secretary proposed amending VA’s regulations concerning dental conditions, inter alia, to list in § 3.”
James Woodson, Claimant-Appellant v. Jesse Brown, Sec'y of Vets. Affairs, 87 F.3d 1304 (Fed. Cir. 1996). “150 , Code 9913; see also 38 C.F.R. § 4.149 . It held that Woodson was not entitled to “Class II” eligibility, see 38 U.”
Woodson v. Brown, 8 Vet. App. 352 (Vet. App. 1995). “150 , Diagnostic Code (DC) 9913 (1994); see also 38 C.F.R. § 4.149 (1994) (stating that “replaceable missing teeth .”
Regis J. Byrd v. R. James Nicholson (Vet. App. 2006). “" 38 C.F.R. § 4.149 (1994). In 1997, the Secretary proposed amending VA's regulations concerning dental conditions, inter alia, to list in § 3.”
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.