Arevalo v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

CourtUnited States Court of Federal Claims
DecidedAugust 13, 2018
Docket15-406
StatusUnpublished

This text of Arevalo v. Secretary of Health and Human Services (Arevalo v. Secretary of Health and Human Services) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Court of Federal Claims primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Arevalo v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, (uscfc 2018).

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

********************* MARISSA AREVALO, guardian * and mother of R.M.R., a minor, * * No. 15-406V Petitioner, * Special Master Christian J. Moran * v. * * Filed: June 12, 2018 SECRETARY OF HEALTH * AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Damages; decision based on proffer; * diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis * (“DTaP”) vaccine; encephalopathy. Respondent. * *********************

Peter C. Beard, Springfield, IL, for Petitioner; Adriana R. Teitel, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

UNPUBLISHED DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1

On April 22, 2015, Marissa Arevalo filed a petition on behalf of her daughter, R.M.R., for compensation under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to 34 (2012). Ms. Arevalo alleged that R.M.R. suffered an on-Table encephalopahty as a result of a diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis (“DTaP”) vaccination administered on May 10, 2012.

Following a hearing, the undersigned ruled that petitioner had established entitlement to compensation for R.M.R.’s on-Table encephalopathy claim under the Vaccine Act. Ruling, issued Dec. 15, 2016, 2016 WL 7666535.

1 The E-Government Act, 44 § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of Electronic Government Services), requires that the Court post this decision on its website. Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 18(b), the parties have 14 days to file a motion proposing redaction of medical information or other information described in 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(d)(4). Any redactions ordered by the special master will appear in the document posted on the website.

1 On June 8, 2018, respondent filed a Proffer on Award of Compensation, to which petitioner agrees. Based upon the record as a whole, the special master finds the Proffer reasonable and that petitioner is entitled to an award as stated in the Proffer. Pursuant to the attached Proffer the court awards petitioner:

a. A lump sum of $1,437,806.43 in the form of a check payable to petitioner as court-appointed guardian of R.M.R.’s estate for lost earnings, pain and suffering, and life care expenses for year one;

b. A lump sum of $3,852.60 in the form of a check payable to petitioner for past unreimbursable expenses;

c. A lump sum of $563,848.98 for compensation for satisfaction of the State of Illinois Medicaid lien in the form of a check jointly payable to petitioner and

Illinois Department of Healthcare & Family Services Bureau of Collections Technical Recovery Section P.O. Box 19174 Springfield, IL 62794-9174 Attn: Mr. Kevin Thornton Medicaid #: 96-080-091613

Petitioner agrees to endorse this payment to the State of Illinois.

d. An amount sufficient to purchase the annuity contract described in section II. D of the attached Proffer.

These amounts represent compensation for all damages that would be available under 42 U.S.C. §300aa-15(a)

In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC, Appendix B, the clerk is directed to enter judgment in case 15-406V according to this decision and the attached proffer.2

2 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties can expedite entry of judgment by each party filing a notice renouncing the right to seek review by a United States Court of Federal Claims judge.

2 Any questions may be directed to my law clerk, Andrew Schick, at (202) 357-6360.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Christian J. Moran Christian J. Moran Special Master

3 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

MARISSA AREVALO, guardian and mother of R.M.R., a minor,

Petitioner, No. 15-406V v. Special Master Moran ECF SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent.

PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION

On December 15, 2016, Special Master Moran issued a Ruling on Entitlement, which

found that petitioner was entitled to Vaccine Act compensation for R.M.R’s alleged Table

Encephalopathy injury.

I. Items of Compensation

A. Life Care Items

The respondent engaged life care planner, M. Virginia Walton, RN, MSN, FNP, CNCLP,

and petitioner engaged Terry K. Arnold, RN, CDMS, CRRN, CLCP, CNLCP, to provide an

estimation of R.M.R.’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 Finding Entitlement. All

items of compensation identified in the joint life care plan are supported by the evidence, and are

illustrated by the chart entitled Appendix A: Items of Compensation for R.M.R., attached hereto

1 of 6 as Tab A. 1 Respondent proffers that R.M.R. should be awarded all items of compensation set

forth in the joint life care plan and illustrated by the chart attached at Tab A. 2 Petitioner agrees.

B. Lost Future Earnings

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

employed in the future. Therefore, respondent proffers that R.M.R. 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 R.M.R.'s lost earnings is $829,794.00. Petitioner agrees.

C. Pain and Suffering

Respondent proffers that R.M.R. should be awarded $250,000.00 in actual pain and

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

D. Past Unreimbursable Expenses

Evidence supplied by petitioner documents her expenditure of past unreimbursable

expenses related to R.M.R.'s vaccine-related injury. Respondent proffers that petitioner should

be awarded past unreimbursable expenses in the amount of $3,852.60. Petitioner agrees.

E. Medicaid Lien

Respondent proffers that R.M.R. should be awarded funds to satisfy a State of Illinois

lien in the amount of $563,848.98, which represents full satisfaction of any right of subrogation,

1 The chart at Tab A illustrates the annual benefits provided by the joint life care plan. The annual benefit years run from the date of judgment up to the first anniversary of the date of judgment, and every year thereafter up to the anniversary of the date of judgment. 2 The parties have no objection to the proffered award of damages. Assuming the Special Master issues a damages decision in conformity with this proffer, the parties intend to waive their right to seek review of such damages decision, recognizing that respondent reserves his right, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(f), to seek review of the Special Master’s December 15, 2016, decision finding petitioner entitled to an award under the Vaccine Act.

2 of 6 assignment, claim, lien, or cause of action the State of Illinois may have against any individual as

a result of any Medicaid payments the State of Illinois has made to or on behalf of R.M.R. from

the date of her eligibility for benefits through the date of judgment in this case as a result of her

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

Related

§ 300aa-1
42 U.S.C. § 300aa-1
§ 300aa-12
42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(d)(4)
§ 300aa-15
42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a)
§ 300a
42 U.S.C. § 300a

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Arevalo v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/arevalo-v-secretary-of-health-and-human-services-uscfc-2018.