Akerstrom v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims·Decided December 31, 2019·No. 12-629·Unpublished

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 12-629V Filed: December 6, 2019 UNPUBLISHED

L.A., a minor, by his parents and natural Guardians, MAGNUS and Special Master Horner BRANDI AKERSTROM, Damages Decision Based on Proffer; Petitioners, Influenza Vaccine; Seizures; v. Encephalitis; Bilateral Striatal Necrosis SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent.

Renee Gentry, Esq., The Law Office of Renee Gentry, Washington, DC for petitioner. Glenn MacLeod, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES 1

On September 24, 2012, petitioners filed a petition for compensation on behalf of their minor son, L.A., under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq., 2 (the “Vaccine Act”). Petitioners alleged that L.A.’s flu mist vaccine caused his seizures and encephalitis. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to Special Master Laura Millman. On December 15, 2016, a ruling on entitlement was issued finding petitioners entitled to compensation for L.A.’s bilateral striatal necrosis. (ECF No. 97.) On June 5, 2019, following Special Master Millman’s retirement, this case was assigned to me.

On December 6, 2019, respondent filed a proffer on award of compensation (“Proffer”) indicating petitioner should be awarded: a lump sum payment of

1 I intend to post this decision on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website. This means the decision 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. Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in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). 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). $1,352,278.47, representing compensation for lost earnings ($1,047,884.72), pain and suffering ($250,000), and life care expenses for year one ($54,393.75), payable to petitioners as guardians/conservators of L.A.; a lump sum payment of $66,794.04, representing compensation for past unreimbursable expenses, payable to petitioners; and an amount sufficient to purchase the annuity contract as described in the Proffer. Proffer at 3. In the Proffer, respondent represented that petitioners agree with the proffered award. Id. Based on the record as a whole, I find that petitioners are entitled to an award as stated in the Proffer.

Accordingly, pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Proffer and accompanying Appendix, I award:

• A lump sum payment of $1,352,278.47 in the form of a check payable to the court-appointed guardian(s)/conservator(s) of the estate of L.A. for the benefit of L.A.; and

• A lump sum payment of $66,794.04 in the form of a check payable jointly to petitioners; and

• An amount sufficient to purchase the annuity contract described in the attached Proffer at Section II.C.

These amounts represent 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.

s/ Daniel T. Horner Daniel T. Horner Special Master

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.

2 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS __________________________________________ ) L.A., a minor, by his parents and natural ) Guardians, MAGNUS and BRANDI ) AKERSTROM, ) ) Petitioners, ) ) v. ) No. 12-629V ) Special Master Horner SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ) HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, ) ) Respondent. ) __________________________________________)

RESPONDENT'S PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION

In her Ruling on Entitlement issued on December 15, 2016, Special Master Millman

found that a preponderance of the evidence supported petitioner’s claim that the FluMist vaccine

administered to L.A. on December 29, 2010, caused his bilateral striatal necrosis. Respondent

now proffers the following regarding the amount of compensation to be awarded. 1

I. Items of Compensation

A. Life Care Items

The respondent engaged life care planner, M. Virginia NeSmith Walton, M.S.N., RN,

FNP, CLCP, and petitioners engaged Nancy J. Bond, CCM, CLCP, to provide an estimation of

L.A.’s future vaccine-injury related needs. For the purposes of this proffer, the term “vaccine

related” is as described in the Special Master’s Ruling on Entitlement. All items of

compensation identified in the life care plan are supported by the evidence, and are illustrated by

1 The parties have no objection to the amount of the proffered award of damages. Assuming the Special Master issues a damages decision in conformity with this proffer, the parties waive their right to seek review of such damages decision. However, respondent reserves his right, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(e), to seek review of the Special Master’s December 15, 2016, Ruling on Entitlement. -1- the chart entitled Appendix A: Items of Compensation for L.A., attached hereto as Tab A. 2

Petitioners agree.

B. Lost Future Earnings

The parties agree that based upon the evidence of record, L.A. will not be gainfully

employed in the future. Therefore, respondent proffers that L.A. should be awarded lost future

earnings as provided under the Vaccine Act, 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a)(3)(B). Respondent

proffers that the appropriate award for L.A.'s lost future earnings is $1,047,884.72. Petitioners

agree.

C. Pain and Suffering

Respondent proffers that L.A. should be awarded $250,000.00 in actual pain and

suffering. See 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a)(4). Petitioners agree.

D. Past Unreimbursable Expenses

Evidence supplied by petitioners documents their expenditure of past unreimbursable

expenses related to L.A.'s vaccine-related injury. Respondent proffers that petitioners should be

awarded past unreimbursable expenses in the amount of $66,794.04. Petitioners agree.

II. Form of the Award

The parties recommend that the compensation provided to L.A. should be made through a

combination of lump sum payments and future annuity payments as described below, and request

that the Special Master's decision and the Court's judgment award the following: 3

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Akerstrom v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, (uscfc 2019).

Akerstrom v. Secretary of Health and Human Services (Akerstrom v. Secretary of Health and Human Services) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

§ 300aa
42 U.S.C. § 300aa
§ 300aa-10
42 U.S.C. § 300aa-10
§ 300aa-12
42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(e)
§ 300aa-15
42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a)(3)(B)
Purposes
44 U.S.C. § 3501
§ 300a
42 U.S.C. § 300a