records and insurance documents, some of which were not previously before the Board. The RO, however, determined that the evidence of record was insufficient to reopen the claim for PTSD. Anglin filed a notice of disagreement with the decision by the RO. Following a hearing in August 1995, the Board also determined that the evidence was insufficient to reopen Anglin’s claim. The CAVC affirmed the relevant portion of the Board’s decision. The CAVC noted that Anglin could not reopen his claim for service connection for PTSD unless he was able to present new and material evidence that the alleged stressor occurred while he was on active duty. In refusing to reopen Anglin’s claim, the CAVC cited the first prong of the so-called Colvin test. See Colvin v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 171 (1991) (<HOLDING>), overruled in part by Hodge v. West, 155 F.3d
holding error in admission of evidence is harmless when it was merely cumulative to other evidence in the record holding no abuse of discretion in trial courts exclusion of evidence where evidence was cumulative holding that material submitted by appellant that is cumulative of evidence previously of record is not new holding impeachment evidence was not merely cumulative where the withheld evidence was of a different character than evidence already known to the defense holding that new evidence is evidence not previously of record and not merely cumulative of other evidence