welcome to elawyers.us
Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change
  1. Home
  2. Case Laws
  3. United States Court of Federal Claims
  4. 2016
  5. Vanderpool v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 15-1400V. (2016)

Vanderpool v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 15-1400V. (2016)

Court: United States Court of Federal Claims Number: infdco20161107a12 Visitors: 1
Filed: Sep. 09, 2016
Latest Update: Sep. 09, 2016
Summary: Unpublished DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES 1 NORA BETH DORSEY , Chief Special Master . On November 19, 2015, 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 received an influenza ("flu") vaccination on December 1, 2014, and thereafter suffered from a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration ("SIRVA"). The case was assigned to the Specia
More

Unpublished

DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1

On November 19, 2015, 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 received an influenza ("flu") vaccination on December 1, 2014, and thereafter suffered from a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration ("SIRVA"). The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit ("SPU") of the Office of Special Masters.

On February 17, 2016, the undersigned issued a ruling on entitlement finding petitioner entitled to compensation for a SIRVA. On September 9, 2016, respondent filed a proffer on award of compensation ("Proffer") indicating petitioner should be awarded $104,801.21. 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 the following compensation:

(a) A lump sum of $4,801.21, which amount represents reimbursement of a State of Washington Medicaid lien, in the form of a check payable jointly to petitioner and Coordinated Care 5615 High Point Drive, Suite 100 Irving, TX 75038

Petitioner agrees to endorse this payment to Coordinated Care; and

(b) A lump sum of $100,000.00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner. This amount and the amount listed in paragraph (a) above represents compensation for all elements of compensation under § 300aa-15(a) to which petitioner is entitled.

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 February 17, 2016, respondent filed her Rule 4(c) Report, in which she recommended that the Court find petitioner entitled to compensation, and on the same date, the Court entered its Ruling on Entitlement, finding petitioner entitled to compensation. Respondent now proffers that petitioner receive an award of compensation as follows:

a. A lump sum of $4,801.21, which amount represents reimbursement of a State of Washington Medicaid lien, in the form of a check payable jointly to petitioner and Coordinated Care 5615 High Point Drive, Suite 100 Irving, TX 75038. Petitioner agrees to endorse this payment to Coordinated Care; and b. A lump sum of $100,000.00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner. This amount and the amount listed in paragraph (a) above represents compensation for all elements of compensation under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a) to which petitioner is entitled.1

Petitioner agrees with the proffered award of $104,801.21.2

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 pain and suffering, and future lost wages.
2. This proffer does not include any award for attorneys' fees and costs that may be awarded pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(e).
Source:  Leagle
Lawyers who claimed
No Lawyers
Citations
15-1400V.
Counsels
  • Danielle Anne Strait
  • Ryan Daniel Pyles
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