Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Deubel v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 18-1436V. (2019)

Court: United States Court of Federal Claims Number: infdco20200108861 Visitors: 3
Filed: Dec. 05, 2019
Latest Update: Dec. 05, 2019
Summary: UNPUBLISHED DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES 1 BRIAN H. CORCORAN , Chief Special Master . On September 20, 2018, Mary Ann Deubel 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 vaccination administered on October 27, 2015. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special
More

UNPUBLISHED

DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1

On September 20, 2018, Mary Ann Deubel 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 vaccination administered on October 27, 2015. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On September 16, 2019, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding Petitioner entitled to compensation for SIRVA. On December 5, 2019, Respondent filed a proffer on award of compensation ("Proffer") indicating Petitioner should be awarded $90,000.00. Proffer at 1. In the Proffer, Respondent represented that Petitioner agrees with the proffered award. Id. Based on the record as a whole, I find that Petitioner is entitled to an award as stated in the Proffer.

Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Proffer, I award Petitioner a lump sum payment of $90,000.00 in the form of a check payable to Petitioner. 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

I. Compensation for Vaccine Injury-Related Items

On September 9, 2019, respondent filed a Rule 4(c) Report conceding entitlement in this case. On September 16, 2019, the Court issued a Ruling on Entitlement finding that petitioner was entitled to vaccine compensation for her Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration ("SIRVA"). Respondent proffers that based on the evidence of record, petitioner should be awarded $90,000.00. This amount represents all elements of compensation to which petitioner is entitled under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a)(1); 15(a)(3)(A); and 15(a)(4). Petitioner agrees.

II. Form of the Award

The parties recommend that the compensation provided to petitioner should be made through a lump sum payment as described below, and request that the Chief Special Master's decision and the Court's judgment award the following:1

A lump sum payment of $90,000.00, in the form of a check payable to petitioner, Mary Ann Deubel. This amount accounts for all elements of compensation under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a) to which petitioner is entitled.

Petitioner is a competent adult. Evidence of guardianship is not required in this case.

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/Linda S. Renzi LINDA S. RENZI Senior Trial Counsel Torts Branch, Civil Division U.S. Department of Justice P.O. Box 146 Benjamin Franklin Station Washington, D.C. 20044-0146 Tel.: (202) 616-4133

FootNotes


1. Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am 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). This means the ruling 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, I agree that the identified material fits within this definition, I 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

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