Board Decision Lookup › Hepatitis / liver

How the Board ruled on hepatitis and liver claims, 2021–2025

How the Board of Veterans' Appeals ruled on hepatitis and liver service-connection claims in 2021–2025, for every theory and secondary pairing we publish. Board-appealed cases only, counted per claim. Last updated October 4, 2026.

These are past Board decisions, not a prediction for any individual case, and not legal advice. The percentage is among DECIDED cases; cases sent back to VA (remanded) are counted separately.

Look up one claim at a time in the Board Decision Lookup →

Hepatitis / liver (direct service connection)

Direct (began in or was caused by service), or theory not stated in the Board order

26.7% granted of 641 decided cases (margin of error 23.4–30.2%). 171 granted, 470 denied, 855 sent back to VA (remanded, not decided), 160 dismissed.

What convinced the Board in granted cases

  • The Board gave little or no weight to VA opinions against a link that were thinly reasoned, inconsistent, confusing, or based on wrong facts, such as an incorrect claim of high-risk activity. (4 of 13 decisions read; e.g. 22046407, 23029239, 23040888)
  • The Board credited private or treating doctors' opinions that reviewed the records and medical research, including how shared air-gun injectors could spread hepatitis C. (3 of 13 decisions read; e.g. 22046407, 23040888, 23018257)
  • The Board accepted the veteran's credible account of an in-service risk, such as air-gun vaccinations, blood exposure, or blood transfusions, even when service records did not show it. (4 of 13 decisions read; e.g. 21016040, 22046407, 22015151)

Common reasons in denied cases

  • The Board denied when no medical opinion supported a link: only the veteran's belief or a general medical article without an expert opinion, often against a thorough, unrebutted VA opinion. (6 of 11 decisions read; e.g. A21002430, 21059228, 21051489)
  • The Board denied when there was no current liver disability, for example hepatitis that had cleared, never been diagnosed, or only elevated liver enzymes. (5 of 11 decisions read; e.g. A25029486, 22055783, 21053082)
  • The Board noted that service records showed no hepatitis risk factors, such as transfusions or needle exposure, and that the diagnosis came long after service. (2 of 11 decisions read, few decisions; e.g. 22031540, 21059228)

See the full answer, year by year →

Hepatitis / liver (exposure claims)

Exposure (e.g. Agent Orange, Camp Lejeune, burn pits)

6% granted of 50 decided cases (margin of error 2.1–16.2%). 3 granted, 47 denied, 59 sent back to VA (remanded, not decided), 3 dismissed.

What convinced the Board in granted cases

  • The Board gave little or no weight to negative VA opinions that were flawed, such as one that denied a link for a liver cancer already service connected. (2 of 4 decisions read, few decisions; e.g. 21065347, 21048065)
  • Grants followed a finding of qualifying Camp Lejeune service, with the evidence then at least balanced that the liver condition was tied to the contaminated water. (3 of 4 decisions read; e.g. 22055631, 22053917, 21048065)

Common reasons in denied cases

  • The Board denied when a detailed VA opinion, sometimes citing literature or the timing between exposure and liver disease, stood unrebutted; one private opinion was rejected as speculative. (5 of 14 decisions read; e.g. 21020445, 21043924, 21068621)
  • The veteran's own belief that exposure caused the liver condition was not competent medical evidence. (4 of 14 decisions read; e.g. 23051746, A21012797, 22002174)
  • Other denials turned on no proven exposure, or liver problems first appearing decades after service; some veterans had no current diagnosis at all. (4 of 14 decisions read; e.g. 21041831, 23004151, 22003406)

See the full answer, year by year →

Hepatitis / liver secondary to any service-connected condition

Secondary (caused or worsened by a service-connected condition)

38.5% granted of 78 decided cases (margin of error 28.4–49.6%). 30 granted, 48 denied, 161 sent back to VA (remanded, not decided), 8 dismissed.

What convinced the Board in granted cases

  • The Board gave strong weight to opinions that reviewed the full record and explained each step of the chain, such as PTSD leading to drug use leading to hepatitis C, often with medical literature. (4 of 10 decisions read; e.g. 21020993, 21014502, 22042361)
  • Hepatitis C was granted secondary to PTSD or another service-connected mental illness when credible evidence showed the veteran used IV drugs to cope with its symptoms. (4 of 10 decisions read; e.g. 21045336, 22045640, 21020993)
  • Fatty liver disease was granted as caused by service-connected diabetes, by pain medication for a service-connected back, or by obesity worsened by service-connected joint conditions. (4 of 10 decisions read; e.g. 21009142, A24011436, 24006404)

Common reasons in denied cases

  • The Board denied when a reasoned VA opinion, often citing literature, found other risk factors such as drug use or tattoos more likely, or found no studies linking the exposure to the liver disease. (6 of 11 decisions read; e.g. 21007079, 21044423, 21012667)
  • The veteran's own belief about the cause was not competent medical evidence, and some veterans' accounts of blood exposure were inconsistent with their records. (4 of 11 decisions read; e.g. 21007079, 22022304, 24027836)
  • Some claims failed because no current liver disorder was diagnosed, or because the underlying condition the claim depended on was not service connected. (3 of 11 decisions read; e.g. 21039226, A25009298, 21030846)

See the full answer, year by year →

Curious how your own records line up? Take the free case check.

Want a medical opinion written for your claim? Submit your case online at flatratenexus.com.

Other conditions

Percentages are shown only for combinations with at least 30 decided cases (granted + denied). Named secondary pairings with 10–29 decided cases are listed as "small sample" with counts only. "ANY service-connected condition (all combined)" pools every secondary claim for that condition. Other combinations exist, but there are too few decided cases to report. Each claim is counted by the Board's ruling on that specific claim (a decision covering several issues is split by issue). Remanded = sent back to VA for more work, not decided. "What convinced the Board" summarizes a reading of up to 25 granted and 25 denied Board decisions for each claim type, with the decision numbers shown so any point can be checked. Board-appealed cases only, not regional-office decisions. Information only, not legal advice. Flat Rate Nexus is a private medical practice, not affiliated with the VA.

Source: Board of Veterans' Appeals decisions, 2021–2025. Last updated October 4, 2026. flatratenexus.com · Privacy · Terms