Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Jackson v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 15-1343 (2017)

Court: United States Court of Federal Claims Number: 15-1343 Visitors: 1
Judges: Brian H. Corcoran
Filed: May 03, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 15-1343V ************************* * Special Master Corcoran JAMES JACKSON, * * Petitioner, * Filed: March 9, 2017 * v. * * Decision by Stipulation; Damages; SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Influenza (“Flu”) Vaccine; AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Vaccine Neuropathy. * Respondent. * * ************************* Donald P. Edwards, Law Office of Donald P. Edwards, Atlanta, GA, for Petitioner. Christine M. Becer, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Washingt
More
                  In the United States Court of Federal Claims
                                     OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
                                             No. 15-1343V

*************************
                           *                                     Special Master Corcoran
JAMES JACKSON,             *
                           *
               Petitioner, *                                     Filed: March 9, 2017
                           *
          v.               *
                           *                                     Decision by Stipulation; Damages;
SECRETARY OF HEALTH        *                                     Influenza (“Flu”) Vaccine;
AND HUMAN SERVICES,        *                                     Vaccine Neuropathy.
                           *
               Respondent. *
                           *
*************************

Donald P. Edwards, Law Office of Donald P. Edwards, Atlanta, GA, for Petitioner.

Christine M. Becer, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

                                  DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1

        On November 6, 2015, James Jackson filed a petition seeking compensation under the
National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (“Vaccine Program”).2 Petitioner alleges that he
suffered from vaccine-caused neuropathy as a result of his January 11, 2013, receipt of the
influenza (“flu”) vaccine. Moreover, Petitioner alleges that he experienced residual effects of this
injury for more than six months.

       Respondent denies that Petitioner’s flu vaccination caused his alleged vaccine neuropathy,
or any other injury or condition. Nonetheless both parties, while maintaining their above-stated



1
  The decision will be posted on the United States Court of Federal Claims website, in accordance with the E-
Government Act of 2002, 44 U.S.C. § 3501 (2012). As provided by 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(d)(4)(B), however, the
parties may object to the decision’s inclusion of certain kinds of confidential information. Specifically, under Vaccine
Rule 18(b), each party has fourteen days within which to request redaction “of any information furnished by that party:
(1) that is a trade secret or commercial or financial in substance and is privileged or confidential; or (2) that includes
medical files or similar files, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy.”
Vaccine Rule 18(b). Otherwise, the whole decision will be available to the public. 
Id. 2 The
Vaccine Program comprises Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660,
100 Stat. 3758, codified as amended at 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10 through 34 (2012) (“Vaccine Act” or “the Act”).
positions, agreed in a stipulation (filed on March 9, 2017) that the issues before them could be
settled, and that a decision should be entered awarding Petitioner compensation.

        I have reviewed the file, and based upon that review, I conclude that the parties’ stipulation
(as attached hereto) is reasonable. I therefore adopt it as my decision in awarding damages on the
terms set forth therein.

         The stipulation awards:

            A lump sum of $50,000.00 in the form of a check payable to Petitioner.

Stipulation ¶ 8. This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available
under Section 15(a) of the Act.

        I approve a Vaccine Program award in the requested amount set forth above to be made to
Petitioner. In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the clerk of
the Court is directed to enter judgment herewith.3


         IT IS SO ORDERED.

                                                                       /s/ Brian H. Corcoran
                                                                          Brian H. Corcoran
                                                                          Special Master




3
 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by each filing (either jointly or separately)
a notice renouncing their right to seek review.

                                                           2

Source:  CourtListener

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