The Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims affirmed the denial of a Veteran’s application for special monthly compensation (SMC) for aid and attendance where the evidence showed that he could feed, dress, and bathe himself and that he was able to live alone. Garcia v. Collins, No. 24-5511, 2025 WL 3043177 (Vet. App. Oct. 31, 2025).
Moses Garcia, a U.S. Army Veteran, served on active duty from 1959 to 1961. In 2022, he filed an application seeking SMC for aid and attendance. Moses submitted an examination describing his difficulties in performing some activities of daily living, including preparing meals, managing medications, ambulating, and leaving his home. Veterans Affairs (VA) denied his application. Moses filed another application in 2023 supported by an examination that he required nursing care because he was a fall risk and was unable to cook his own food. The exam indicated that he could use the restroom, bathe, and feed himself without assistance. The VA again denied his application.
Moses appealed to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals. In 2024, the Board denied his application, determining that he did not have a service-related visual disability and did not reside in a nursing home. In addition, it found that Moses’s service-connected disabilities did not preclude him from dressing, bathing, and feeding himself or using the restroom by himself and that he did not require care to protect him from dangers in his daily environment. Moses appealed the Board’s decision.
The Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims reviewed the Board’s determination under the clearly erroneous standard, under which the court will reverse the Board’s decision only if all the evidence leaves it with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake was made. The court noted that a Veteran is entitled to SMC under 38 U.S.C. § 1114(l) and 38 C.F.R. § 3.352(a) if the Veteran is so helpless as to require the regular aid and attendance of another person to perform basic daily functions.
The court found that the Board had not clearly erred because Moses was not helpless enough to require the aid and attendance of another person. The evidence showed that he could feed, dress, and bathe himself and that he lived alone, albeit with the assistance of a friend who helped him with housecleaning and preparing meals. In addition, although a medical provider stated that Moses may need nursing care, he did not live at a nursing home but lived alone in his own home. Because Moses’s evidence did not establish that he was entitled to aid and attendance under 38 C.F.R. § 3.352, the court affirmed the Board’s decision.
Subscribe to the Knowledge Bank.
