Judges: Nora Beth Dorsey
Filed: Oct. 10, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 17-0062V Filed: May 22, 2019 UNPUBLISHED TERESA TURKO, Petitioner, v. Special Processing Unit (SPU); Attorneys’ Fees and Costs SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Joseph Alexander Vuckovich, Maglio Christopher & Toale, PA, Washington, DC, for petitioner. Debra A. Filteau Begley, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent. DECISION ON ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS 1 Dorsey, Chief Special Master:
Summary: In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 17-0062V Filed: May 22, 2019 UNPUBLISHED TERESA TURKO, Petitioner, v. Special Processing Unit (SPU); Attorneys’ Fees and Costs SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. Joseph Alexander Vuckovich, Maglio Christopher & Toale, PA, Washington, DC, for petitioner. Debra A. Filteau Begley, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent. DECISION ON ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS 1 Dorsey, Chief Special Master: ..
More
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 17-0062V
Filed: May 22, 2019
UNPUBLISHED
TERESA TURKO,
Petitioner,
v. Special Processing Unit (SPU);
Attorneys’ Fees and Costs
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES,
Respondent.
Joseph Alexander Vuckovich, Maglio Christopher & Toale, PA, Washington, DC, for
petitioner.
Debra A. Filteau Begley, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
DECISION ON ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS 1
Dorsey, Chief Special Master:
On January 13, 2017, Teresa Turko (“petitioner”) filed a petition for compensation
under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et
seq., 2 (the “Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that she suffered a left shoulder injury
related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) as a result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine she
received on October 26, 2015. Petition at 1. On December 17, 2018, the undersigned
issued a decision awarding compensation to petitioner based on the parties’ stipulation.
ECF No. 50.
1 The undersigned intends to post this decision on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website.
This means the decision will be available to anyone with access to the Internet. In accordance with
Vaccine Rule 18(b), petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to redact medical or other information,
the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, the
undersigned agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, the undersigned will redact such
material from public access. Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the
action in this case, the undersigned is required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims'
website in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal
Management and Promotion of Electronic Government Services).
2National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for
ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. §
300aa (2012).
On April 18, 2019, petitioner filed a motion for attorneys’ fees and costs. ECF
No. 56. Petitioner requests attorneys’ fees in the amount of $30,468.40 and attorneys’
costs in the amount of $873.49.
Id. at 1-2. In compliance with General Order #9,
petitioner filed a signed statement indicating that petitioner incurred no out-of-pocket
expenses.
Id. at 2. Thus, the total amount requested is $31,341.89.
On April 29, 2019, respondent filed a response to petitioner’s motion. ECF No.
57. Respondent states that “[n]either the Vaccine Act nor Vaccine Rule 13
contemplates any role for respondent in the resolution of a request by a petitioner for an
award of attorneys’ fees and costs.”
Id. at 1. Respondent adds, however, that he “is
satisfied the statutory requirements for an award of attorneys’ fees and costs are met in
this case.”
Id. at 2. Respondent “respectfully recommends that the Chief Special
Master exercise her discretion and determine a reasonable award for attorneys’ fees
and costs.”
Id. at 3.
On April 30, 2019, petitioner filed a reply. ECF No. 58. Petitioner disputes
respondent’s position that he has no role in resolving attorneys’ fees and costs and
further reiterates his view that his attorneys’ fees and costs in this case are reasonable.
Petitioner disputes respondent’s position that he has no role in resolving
attorneys’ fees and costs and further reiterates his view that his attorneys’ fees and
costs in this case are reasonable.
The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs. §
15(e). Based on the reasonableness of petitioner’s request, the undersigned GRANTS
petitioner’s motion for attorneys’ fees and costs.
Accordingly, the undersigned awards the total of $31,341.89 3 as a lump
sum in the form of a check jointly payable to petitioner and petitioner’s counsel
Joseph Alexander Vuckovich. Petitioner requests check be forwarded to Maglio
Christopher & Toale, 1605 Main Street, Suite 710, Sarasota, Florida 34236.
The clerk of the court shall enter judgment in accordance herewith. 4
3 This amount is intended to cover all legal expenses incurred in this matter. This award encompasses all
charges by the attorney against a client, “advanced costs” as well as fees for legal services rendered.
Furthermore, § 15(e)(3) prevents an attorney from charging or collecting fees (including costs) that would
be in addition to the amount awarded herein. See generally Beck v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs.,
924 F.2d 1029 (Fed. Cir.1991).
4 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice
renouncing the right to seek review.
2
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Nora Beth Dorsey
Nora Beth Dorsey
Chief Special Master
3