Opinion ID: 2752527
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Gunshot wound

Text: In September 1979, after being “[a]ccidentally shot in the arm,” Mr. Washington filed a claim stating that he was hospitalized for a gunshot wound. Washington, 2014 1 Washington v. Shinseki, No. 12-0136, 2014 WL 351771 (Vet. App. Feb. 3, 2014). WASHINGTON v. MCDONALD 3 WL 351771, at . In October 1979, Mr. Washington submitted a report stating that he was shot during a robbery. Medical records from December 1982, September 1999, and October 2000 also note Mr. Washington’s statements that he was shot during a robbery. At a Board hearing in March 2011, Mr. Washington stated that he was on inactive duty when he was shot, but “had gone on active duty for training for a meeting” and was shot on his way home. Id. The Board found that Mr. Washington’s statements to medical professionals in the course of seeking treatment were more credible than his statements at the 2011 Board hearing. The Board further found that there was no evidence that Mr. Washington was acting in the line of duty when he was shot. Pursuant to a concession by the government, the Veterans Court remanded Mr. Washington’s claim because “the Board provided an inadequate statement of reasons or bases for its decision” and “failed to make an explicit finding that all available federal records had been obtained.” Id. at .