welcome to elawyers.us
Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change
  1. Home
  2. Case Laws
  3. United States Court of Federal Claims
  4. 2015
  5. STORY v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, 15-0530V. (2015)

STORY v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, 15-0530V. (2015)

Court: United States Court of Federal Claims Number: infdco20160115h83 Visitors: 15
Filed: Nov. 13, 2015
Latest Update: Nov. 13, 2015
Summary: DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES 1 NORA BETH DORSEY , Chief Special Master . On May 26, 2015, MaryAnn Story ("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" or "Program"). Petitioner alleged that she suffered an injury to her right shoulder as a result of an influenza ("flu") vaccine administered on November 20, 2014. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of
More

DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1

On May 26, 2015, MaryAnn Story ("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" or "Program"). Petitioner alleged that she suffered an injury to her right shoulder as a result of an influenza ("flu") vaccine administered on November 20, 2014. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On October 21, 2015, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding petitioner entitled to compensation for a Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration ("SIRVA"). On November 13, 2015, respondent filed a proffer on award of compensation ("Proffer") indicating petitioner should be awarded $105,275.00. 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 $105,275.00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner, MaryAnn Story.3 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.4

IT IS SO ORDERED.

PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION

I. Items of Compensation

Based upon the evidence of record, respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded $105,275.00, which 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

Respondent recommends that the compensation provided to petitioner should be made through a lump sum payment of $105,275.00, in the form of a check payable to petitioner. Petitioner agrees.

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, Pub. L. No. 107-347, § 205, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (codified as amended at 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2006)). 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. "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." Proffer at 1, fn. 1.
4. 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 medical expenses, future lost earnings, and future pain and suffering.
Source:  Leagle
Lawyers who claimed
No Lawyers
Citations
15-0530V.
Counsels
  • Andrew Donald Downing
  • Sarah Christina Duncan
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