Burghardt v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
This text of Burghardt v. Secretary of Health and Human Services (Burghardt 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.
Opinion
In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 15-67V Filed: February 12, 2016 Unpublished
**************************** J.B., * * Petitioner, * Damages Decision Based on * Stipulation; Influenza; * Shoulder Injury (“SIRVA”); SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Special Processing Unit (“SPU”) AND HUMAN SERVICES, * * Respondent. * * **************************** Ronald Thomas Tomasko, JSDC Law Offices, Hershey, PA, for petitioner. Traci R. Patton, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES 1
Dorsey, Chief Special Master:
On January 23, 2015, Petitioner filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq., 2 [the “Vaccine Act” or “Program”]. Petitioner alleges that she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) as a result of her January 30, 2013 influenza vaccination. Petition at 28-29. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.
On April 22, 2016, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding petitioner entitled to compensation for SIRVA. On February 11, 2016, respondent filed a joint stipulation by the parties stipulating that petitioner should be awarded $1,500,000.00. Stipulation at ¶ 9. Based on the record as a whole, the undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to an award as stated in the stipulation.
1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the undersigned intends to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website,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). 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.
2National 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). Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached stipulation, the undersigned awards petitioner a lump sum payment of $1,500,000.00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner, J.B. This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available under § 300aa-15(a).
The clerk of the court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this decision. 3
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Nora Beth Dorsey Nora Beth Dorsey Chief 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.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Burghardt v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/burghardt-v-secretary-of-health-and-human-services-uscfc-2016.