Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

SHIVES v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, 15-0296V. (2015)

Court: United States Court of Federal Claims Number: infdco20151021803 Visitors: 7
Filed: Sep. 16, 2015
Latest Update: Sep. 16, 2015
Summary: DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES 1 DENISE K. VOWELL , Special Masters . On March 23, 2015, Nadara Shives filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. 300aa-10, et seq, 2 [the "Vaccine Act" or "Program"]. The petition alleged that as a result of an influenza ("flu") vaccination on September 20, 2013, petitioner suffered a right shoulder injury related to vaccine administration ("SIRVA"). The case was assigned to the Special Processing Uni
More

DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1

On March 23, 2015, Nadara Shives filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq,2 [the "Vaccine Act" or "Program"]. The petition alleged that as a result of an influenza ("flu") vaccination on September 20, 2013, petitioner suffered a right shoulder injury related to vaccine administration ("SIRVA"). The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters ("SPU").

On June 12, 2015, I issued a ruling on entitlement, finding petitioner entitled to compensation. On September 16, 2015, respondent filed a proffer on award of compensation ("Proffer") detailing compensation for all elements of compensation to which petitioner would be entitled under §15(a). According to respondent's Proffer, petitioner agrees to the proposed award of compensation.

Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Proffer, I award petitioner a lump sum payment of $120,000.00 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.

RESPONDENT'S PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION

Respondent filed her Vaccine Rule 4(c) Report on June 11, 2015, conceding that petitioner was entitled to receive compensation for a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration ("SIRVA"), which was caused by the flu vaccination she received on September 20, 2013. On July 8, 2015, the Special Master issued a decision finding that a preponderance of the medical evidence established that petitioner's SIRVA injury was causally related to the flu vaccination she received on September 20, 2013. The parties proceeded thereafter to address the amount of compensation to be awarded in this case.

I. Items of Compensation

Based upon the evidence of record, respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded a total lump sum of $120,000.00, which amount represents all elements of compensation to which petitioner would be entitled under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a).1 Petitioner agrees.

II. Form of the Award

The parties recommend that the compensation provided to petitioner should be made through a lump sum payment of $120,000.00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner. Petitioner agrees.

Respectfully submitted, BENJAMIN C. MIZER Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General RUPA BHATTACHARYYA Director Torts Branch, Civil Division VINCENT J. MATANOSKI Deputy Director Torts Branch, Civil Division LYNN E. RICCIARDELLA Senior Trial Attorney Torts Branch, Civil Division /s/ GLENN A. MACLEOD GLENN A. MACLEOD Senior Trial Counsel Torts Branch, Civil Division U.S. Department of Justice P.O. Box 146, Benjamin Franklin Station Washington, D.C. 20044-0146 Tel: (202) 616-4122

FootNotes


1. Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I intend to post this decision on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (Dec. 17, 2002). In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), petitioners have 14 days to identify and move to delete 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 delete such material from public access.
2. National 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).
3. Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by each party filing a notice renouncing the right to seek review.
1. Should petitioner die prior to entry of judgment, respondent would oppose any award for future medical expenses, future lost earnings, and future pain and suffering, and the parties reserve the right to move the Court for appropriate relief.
Source:  Leagle

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