Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Carter v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 18-1966 (2020)

Court: United States Court of Federal Claims Number: 18-1966 Visitors: 8
Judges: Brian H. Corcoran
Filed: Mar. 26, 2020
Latest Update: Mar. 27, 2020
Summary: In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 18-1966V UNPUBLISHED KATHERINE P. CARTER, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: February 21, 2020 v. Special Processing Unit (SPU); SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND Damages Decision Based on Proffer; HUMAN SERVICES, Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Respondent. Administration (SIRVA) Kyle Monroe Moore, Law Office of Kyle M. Moore, LLC, Gainesville, GA, for petitioner. Lara Ann Englund, U.S. Dep
More
    In the United States Court of Federal Claims
                                  OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
                                          No. 18-1966V
                                         UNPUBLISHED


    KATHERINE P. CARTER,                                      Chief Special Master Corcoran

                         Petitioner,                          Filed: February 21, 2020
    v.
                                                              Special Processing Unit (SPU);
    SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND                                   Damages Decision Based on Proffer;
    HUMAN SERVICES,                                           Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; Shoulder
                                                              Injury Related to Vaccine
                        Respondent.                           Administration (SIRVA)


Kyle Monroe Moore, Law Office of Kyle M. Moore, LLC, Gainesville, GA, for petitioner.

Lara Ann Englund, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.


                                DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1

        On December 21, 2018, Katherine P. Carter 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 an injury, described as
adhesive capsulitis or frozen shoulder, which meets the Table definition for a shoulder
injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) after receiving the seasonal influenza
vaccination on October 18, 2017. Petition at 1, ¶¶ 2, 12. The case was assigned to the
Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

        On December 16, 2019, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding Petitioner
entitled to compensation for her SIRVA. On February 21, 2020, Respondent filed a
proffer on award of compensation (“Proffer”) indicating Petitioner should be awarded
$95,000.00. Proffer at 1. In the Proffer, Respondent represented that Petitioner agrees

1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am
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). 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, I agree that the identified material fits within this definition, I will redact such
material from public access.

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).
with the proffered award.
Id. Based on
the record as a whole, I find that Petitioner is
entitled to an award as stated in the Proffer.

     Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Proffer, I award Petitioner a lump
sum payment of $95,000.00 in the form of a check payable to Petitioner. This
amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available under § 15(a).

       The clerk of the court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this
decision.3

IT IS SO ORDERED.


                                          s/Brian H. Corcoran
                                          Brian H. Corcoran
                                          Chief Special Master




3 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
               IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS
                         OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

KATHERINE P. CARTER,                               )
                                                   )
                      Petitioner,                  )
                                                   )
       v.                                          ) No. 18-1966V
                                                   ) Chief Special Master Brian Corcoran
SECRETARY OF                                       )
HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,                         )
                                                   )
                      Respondent.                  )
                                                   )

            RESPONDENT’S PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION

       On December 11, 2019, respondent filed a Vaccine Rule 4(c) report concluding that

petitioner suffered a Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration within the Table

timeframe following an influenza vaccination, and conceding petitioner’s entitlement to

compensation under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, as amended, 42 U.S.C.

§§300aa-10 to -34. Accordingly, on December 16, 2019, the Chief Special Master issued a

Ruling on Entitlement.

I.    Items of Compensation

       Respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded $95,000.00. This amount

represents all elements of compensation to which petitioner would be entitled under 42 U.S.C.

§ 300aa-15(a). Petitioner agrees.
II.    Form of the Award

       Respondent recommends that the compensation provided to petitioner should be made

through a lump sum payment of $95,000.00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner. 1 This

lump sum payment represents all elements of compensation to which petitioner would be entitled

under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). Petitioner agrees.

       Petitioner is a competent adult. Evidence of guardianship is not required in this case.

                                              Respectfully submitted,

                                              JOSEPH H. HUNT
                                              Assistant Attorney General

                                              C. SALVATORE D’ALESSIO
                                              Acting Director
                                              Torts Branch, Civil Division

                                              CATHARINE E. REEVES
                                              Deputy Director
                                              Torts Branch, Civil Division

                                              ALEXIS B. BABCOCK
                                              Assistant Director
                                              Torts Branch, Civil Division

                                              s/ LARA A. ENGLUND
                                              LARA A. ENGLUND
                                              Senior Trial Attorney
                                              Torts Branch, Civil Division
                                              U.S. Department of Justice
                                              P.O. Box 146 Benjamin Franklin Station
                                              Washington D.C. 20044-0146
                                              Tel: (202) 307-3013
                                              E-mail: lara.a.englund@usdoj.gov

Dated: February 20, 2020




1
  Should petitioner die prior to entry of judgment, the parties reserve the right to move the Court
for appropriate relief. In particular, respondent would oppose any award for future medical
expenses, future pain and suffering, and future lost wages.
                                                 2

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer