Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Landis v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 15-1562V. (2020)

Court: United States Court of Federal Claims Number: infdco20200302797 Visitors: 8
Filed: Jan. 13, 2020
Latest Update: Jan. 13, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED DECISION AWARDING ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS 1 CHRISTIAN J. MORAN , Special Master . On September 4, 2019, petitioner David Landis moved for final attorneys' fees and costs. He is awarded $16,184.44. * * * On December 21, 2015, David Landis filed for compensation under the Nation Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. 300aa-10 through 34. The petition alleged that a tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis vaccine, which is contained in the Vaccine Injury Table, 42 C
More

UNPUBLISHED DECISION AWARDING ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS1

On September 4, 2019, petitioner David Landis moved for final attorneys' fees and costs. He is awarded $16,184.44.

* * *

On December 21, 2015, David Landis filed for compensation under the Nation Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10 through 34. The petition alleged that a tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis vaccine, which is contained in the Vaccine Injury Table, 42 C.F.R. § 100.3(a), significantly aggravated his preexisting osteoarthritis. Petitioner further alleged that he suffered the residual effects of this injury for more than six months. On August 20, 2019, the undersigned issued his decision denying compensation and dismissing the petition.

On September 4, 2019, petitioner filed a motion for final attorneys' fees and costs ("Fees App."). Petitioner requests attorneys' fees of $15,955.00 and attorneys' costs of $229.44 for a total request of $16,184.44. Fees App. at 1. On September 5, 2019, respondent filed a response to petitioner's motion. Respondent argues that "[n]either the Vaccine Act nor Vaccine Rule 13 contemplates any role for respondent in the resolution of a request by a petitioner for an award of attorneys' fees and costs." Response at 1. Respondent adds, however that he "is satisfied the statutory requirements for an award of attorneys' fees and costs are met in this case." Id at 2. Additionally, he recommends "that the special master exercise his discretion" when determining a reasonable award for attorneys' fees and costs. Id. at 3. Petitioner did not file a reply thereafter.

* * *

Petitioners who have not been awarded compensation are eligible for an award of attorneys' fees and costs when "the petition was brought in good faith and there was a reasonable basis for the claim." 42 U.S.C.§300aa-15(e)(1). Previously, the undersigned determined that good faith and reasonable basis existed when awarding interim attorneys' fees. See Landis v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., No. 15-1562V, 2019 WL 1061516, at *2 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Feb. 5, 2019). Respondent also agrees that the statutory requirements for an award of attorneys' fees and costs have been met in this case. Response at 4.

The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorney's fees and costs. §15(e). The Federal Circuit has approved the lodestar approach to determine reasonable attorneys' fees and costs under the Vaccine Act. This is a two-step process. Avera v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 515 F.3d 1343, 1348 (Fed. Cir. 2008). First, a court determines an "initial estimate ... by `multiplying the number of hours reasonably expended on the litigation times a reasonable hourly rate.'" Id. at 1347-48 (quoting Blum v. Stenson, 465 U.S. 886, 888 (1984)). Second, the court may make an upward or downward departure from the initial calculation of the fee award based on specific findings. Id. at 1348. Here, because the lodestar process yields a reasonable result, no additional adjustments are required. Instead, the analysis focuses on the elements of the lodestar formula, a reasonable hourly rate and a reasonable number of hours.

In light of the Secretary's lack of objection, the undersigned has reviewed the fee application for its reasonableness. See McIntosh v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 139 Fed. Cl. 238 (2018)

A. Reasonable Hourly Rates

Under the Vaccine Act, special masters, in general, should use the forum (District of Columbia) rate in the lodestar calculation. Avera, 515 F.3d at 1349. There is, however, an exception (the so-called Davis County exception) to this general rule when the bulk of the work is done outside the District of Columbia and the attorneys' rates are substantially lower. Id. 1349 (citing Davis Cty. Solid Waste Mgmt. and Energy Recovery Special Serv. Dist. v. U.S. Envtl. Prot. Agency, 169 F.3d 755, 758 (D.C. Cir. 1999)). In this case, all the attorneys' work was done outside of the District of Columbia.

Petitioner requests that his counsel, Mr. Landis, be compensated at $250.00 per hour for attorney work and $100.00 per hour for paralegal work done in this case. These rates are identical to what the undersigned previously awarded Mr. Landis in the interim fees decision and shall be awarded herein. Landis, 2019 WL 1061516 at *2.

B. Reasonable Number of Hours

The second factor in the lodestar formula is a reasonable number of hours. Reasonable hours are not excessive, redundant, or otherwise unnecessary. See Saxton v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 3 F.3d 1517, 1521 (Fed. Cir. 1993). The Secretary also did not directly challenge any of the requested hours as unreasonable.

Upon review of the submitted billing records, the undersigned finds the billed hours to be reasonable. Accordingly, petitioner is entitled to the full amount of attorney's fees sought.

C. Costs Incurred

Like attorneys' fees, a request for reimbursement of costs must be reasonable. Perreira v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 27 Fed. Cl. 29, 34 (Fed. Cl. 1992), aff'd, 33 F.3d 1375 (Fed. Cir. 1994). Petitioner requests a total of $229.44 in costs for travel to meet with petitioner and close out the case. The undersigned finds these costs to be reasonable and shall award them in full.

E. Conclusion

The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorney's fees and costs. 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(e). Accordingly, I award a total of $16,184.44 (representing $15,955.00 in attorneys' fees and $229.44 in attorneys' costs) as a lump sum in the form of a check jointly payable to petitioner and petitioner's counsel, Mr. Dan Bolton, III.

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.2

IT IS SO ORDERED.

FootNotes


1. The undersigned intends to post this Ruling on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website. 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, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from public access. Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the undersigned is 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).
2. Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by filing a joint notice renouncing their right to seek review.
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