Steelman v. Brown — Court lacked jurisdiction over a compensable rating issue not first decided by the Board

In this appeal, the Court had previously resolved all issues except a claimed compensable rating for a left ring finger injury scar. The Board had granted service connection for the scar but did not decide any disability rating, and the Secretary explained that the rating matter had been left for regional office adjudication. The Court therefore held that the compensable rating issue was not properly before it because it had not been presented to or decided by the Board. The Court relied on Branham v. Derwinski for the proposition that it could not review an issue raised for the first time on appeal. The Court expressly declined to decide the separate jurisdictional question concerning whether it could reverse the Board’s service-connection determination for the scar.

The Court lacks jurisdiction to consider an issue that was not before the Board and was raised for the first time on appeal.

A claimant cannot bypass agency adjudication by presenting a new rating issue directly to the Veterans Court; the issue must first be decided by the Board.

Steelman illustrates the strict issue-preservation limits on Veterans Court review. It is useful when arguing that a matter is outside the Court’s jurisdiction because the Board never addressed it, and it cautions advocates to secure a Board decision on each distinct benefit element before appealing.

Raising an issue in the Veterans Court that was never adjudicated by the Board.

A veteran receives service connection for a scar from the Board but the Board says nothing about the percentage rating. If the veteran asks the Veterans Court to award a compensable rating in the first instance, Steelman supports dismissal or refusal to consider that issue.

Use this case to challenge attempts to litigate new entitlement or rating questions in the Court when the Board has not issued a decision on them.

Branham v. Derwinski