welcome to elawyers.us
Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change
  1. Home
  2. Case Laws
  3. United States Court of Federal Claims
  4. 2019
  5. Hernandez v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 18-0137V. (2019)

Hernandez v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 18-0137V. (2019)

Court: United States Court of Federal Claims Number: infdco20190830993 Visitors: 7
Filed: Jun. 17, 2019
Latest Update: Jun. 17, 2019
Summary: UNPUBLISHED DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES 1 NORA BETH DORSEY , Chief Special Master . On January 29, 2018, Ricardo Hernandez ("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 a flu vaccine administered on September 27, 2016, caused-in-fact "debilitating pain, restricted range of motion, and adhesive capsulitis of his left shoulder and arm[.]" Petition at prea
More

UNPUBLISHED

DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1

On January 29, 2018, Ricardo Hernandez ("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 a flu vaccine administered on September 27, 2016, caused-in-fact "debilitating pain, restricted range of motion, and adhesive capsulitis of his left shoulder and arm[.]" Petition at preamble. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On March 1, 2019, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding petitioner entitled to compensation for SIRVA. On June 14, 2019, respondent filed a proffer on award of compensation ("Proffer") indicating petitioner should be awarded $115.000.00, which represents compensation for pain and suffering. Proffer at 1. In the Proffer, respondent represented that petitioner agrees with the proffered award. Id. Based on the record as a whole, the undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to an award as stated in the Proffer.

Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Proffer, the undersigned awards petitioner a lump sum payment of $115,000.00 (which represents compensation for pain and suffering) in the form of a check payable to petitioner, Ricardo Hernandez. 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

On March 1, 2019, respondent filed a Rule 4(c) Report, conceding that petitioner's claim meets the Table criteria for a SIRVA injury. On that same date, the Court issued a Ruling on Entitlement finding petitioner entitled to compensation under the Vaccine Act.

I. Items of Compensation

Based upon the evidence of record, respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded the following, and requests that the Chief Special Master's decision and the Court's judgment award:

A lump sum payment of $115,000.00, which represents compensation for pain and suffering, see 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a)(4).

This amounts represent 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

Petitioner is a competent adult. Evidence of guardianship is not required in this case. Respondent recommends that petitioner be awarded a lump sum payment of $115,000.00, in the form of a check payable to petitioner. Petitioner agrees.

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/DEBRA A. FILTEAU BEGLEY DEBRA A. FILTEAU BEGLEY Senior Trial Attorney Torts Branch, Civil Division U.S. Department of Justice P.O. Box 146 Benjamin Franklin Station Washington, D.C. 20044-0146 Phone: (202) 616-4181 Dated: June 14, 2019

FootNotes


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, 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).
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 the parties' joint filing of notice renouncing the right to seek review.
1. Should petitioner die prior to the entry of judgment, the parties reserve the right to move the Court for appropriate relief. In particular, respondent would oppose any award for future pain and suffering.
Source:  Leagle
Lawyers who claimed
No Lawyers
Citations
18-0137V.
Counsels
  • David Alexander Tierney
  • Debra A. Filteau Begley
Similar Cases

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