Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Schuster v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 18-1220 (2020)

Court: United States Court of Federal Claims Number: 18-1220 Visitors: 9
Judges: Herbrina Sanders
Filed: Aug. 25, 2020
Latest Update: Aug. 25, 2020
Summary: In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS Filed: August 10, 2020 ************************* THOMAS SCHUSTER, * No. 18-1220V * Petitioner, * Special Master Sanders v. * * SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Stipulation for Award; Influenza (“flu”) AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Vaccine; Transverse Myelitis (“TM”); * Guillain-Barré Syndrome (“GBS”) Respondent. * ************************* Jeffrey S. Pop, Jeffrey S. Pop & Associates, Beverly Hills, CA, for Petitioner. Linda S. Renzi, United Sta
More
In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS Filed: August 10, 2020 ************************* THOMAS SCHUSTER, * No. 18-1220V * Petitioner, * Special Master Sanders v. * * SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Stipulation for Award; Influenza (“flu”) AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Vaccine; Transverse Myelitis (“TM”); * Guillain-Barré Syndrome (“GBS”) Respondent. * ************************* Jeffrey S. Pop, Jeffrey S. Pop & Associates, Beverly Hills, CA, for Petitioner. Linda S. Renzi, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION 1 On August 15, 2018, Thomas Schuster (“Petitioner”) filed a petition for compensation pursuant to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. 2 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10 to -34 (2012); Pet. at 1, ECF No. 1. Petitioner alleged that the influenza (“flu”) vaccine he received on August 22, 2015, caused him to develop Transverse Myelitis (“TM”) and Guillain-Barré Syndrome (“GBS”). See Stip. at 1, ECF No. 29; Pet. at 1. Petitioner further alleged that he experienced the residual effects of his injuries for more than six months. Stip. at 1. On July 29, 2020, the parties filed a stipulation in which they state that a decision should be entered awarding compensation to Petitioner. Id. at 2. Respondent denies that the flu vaccine caused Petitioner’s alleged TM, GBS, or any other injury. Id. Nevertheless, the parties agree to the joint stipulation, attached hereto as Appendix A. I find the stipulation reasonable and adopt it as the decision of the Court in awarding damages, on the terms set forth therein. 1 This Decision shall be posted on the website of the United States Court of Federal Claims, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, § 205, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (codified as amended at 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012)). This means the Decision will be available to anyone with access to the Internet. As provided by Vaccine Rule 18(b), each party has 14 days within which to request redaction “of any information furnished by that party: (1) that is a trade secret or commercial or financial in substance and is privileged or confidential; or (2) that includes medical files or similar files, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy.” Vaccine Rule 18(b). 2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. The parties stipulate that Petitioner shall receive the following compensation: A lump sum of $202,759.85, which amount represents compensation for first year life care expenses ($49,181.89), pain and suffering ($140,000.00)[,] and past unreimbursable expenses ($13,577.96) in the form of a check payable to [P]etitioner; and… [a]n amount sufficient to purchase the annuity contract described in paragraph 10 [of the stipulation], paid to the life insurance company from which the annuity will be purchased….This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). Id. at 2. I approve the requested amount for Petitioner’s compensation. Accordingly, an award should be made consistent with the stipulation. In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the Clerk of Court SHALL ENTER JUDGMENT in accordance with the terms of the parties’ stipulation. 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Herbrina D. Sanders Herbrina D. Sanders Special Master 3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment is expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice renouncing the right to seek review. 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