Court Opinion

ID: 9502368
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 18:50:12.658589+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:00:53.737975
License: Public Domain

KRAMER, Chief Judge,
concurring:
Assuming that, on remand, the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) determines that there is no duty to assist the appellant by providing the medical examination in question, the Board should nevertheless address with an adequate statement of reasons or bases the following: whether the *237hearing officer promised the appellant a VA examination (see Record at 169-72, 175-76); whether the hearing officer ,was authorized to promise an examination and, if so, whether that authorization could have been rescinded by another VA employee; whether the appellant reasonably relied to his detriment on the hearing officer’s statements; and, assuming that he could have reasonably relied on those statements, what is the significance of any such reliance in the context of this case. See Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 49, 56-57 (1990).