welcome to elawyers.us
Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change
  1. Home
  2. Case Laws
  3. United States Court of Federal Claims
  4. 2017
  5. Ridgeway v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 16-1342V. (2017)

Ridgeway v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 16-1342V. (2017)

Court: United States Court of Federal Claims Number: infdco20171023i24 Visitors: 2
Filed: Mar. 17, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 17, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES 1 NORA BETH DORSEY , Chief Special Master . On October 14, 2016, 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 Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration ("SIRVA") as a result of an influenza ("flu") vaccine she received on December 11, 2015. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Pr
More

UNPUBLISHED

DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1

On October 14, 2016, 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 Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration ("SIRVA") as a result of an influenza ("flu") vaccine she received on December 11, 2015. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On March 2, 2017, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding petitioner entitled to compensation for a SIRVA. On March 16, 2017, respondent filed a proffer on award of compensation ("Proffer") indicating petitioner should be awarded $125,000.00. Proffer at 1. In the Proffer, respondent represented that petitioner agrees with the proffered award. 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 $125,000.00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner, Brittany N. Ridgeway. This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available under § 300aa-15(a).

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

IT IS SO ORDERED.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS BRITTANY N. RIDGEWAY, Petitioner, No. 16-1342V v. Chief Special Master Dorsey ECF SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMANSERVICES, Respondent.

RESPONDENT'S PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION

I. Items of Compensation

For purposes of this proffer, the term "vaccine-related" is as described in Respondent's Rule 4(c) Report, filed on February 28, 2017, conceding entitlement in this case. Based upon the evidence of record, respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded $125,000.00, which represents all elements of compensation to which petitioner would be entitled under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a) for her vaccine-related injury.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 $125,000.00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner. Petitioner agrees.

Respectfully submitted, CHAD A. READLER Acting 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 Senior Trial Attorney Torts Branch, Civil Division s/Ann D. Martin _____________________________ ANN D. MARTIN 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) 307-1815 DATED: March 16, 2017

FootNotes


1. Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the undersigned intends 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). 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.
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 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 lost earnings, and future pain and suffering.
Source:  Leagle
Lawyers who claimed
No Lawyers
Citations
16-1342V.
Counsels
  • Douglas Lee Burdette
  • Ann Donohue Martin
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