Freedman v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
This text of Freedman v. Secretary of Health and Human Services (Freedman 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In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 16-1357V Filed: September 7, 2017 UNPUBLISHED
DOUGLAS A. FREEDMAN, Special Processing Unit (SPU); Petitioner, Damages Decision Based on Proffer; v. Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND Administration (SIRVA) HUMAN SERVICES,
Respondent.
Edward M. Kraus, Law Offices of Chicago Kent, Chicago, IL, for petitioner. Lisa Ann Watts, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1
Dorsey, Chief Special Master:
On October 18, 2016, Douglas A. Freedman (“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 alleged that he suffered shoulder pain and restricted range of motion caused-in-fact by the influenza vaccine he received on October 23, 2013. Petition at 1, ¶¶ 4, 41.
On March 24, 2017, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding petitioner entitled to compensation for shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”). On September 5, 2017, respondent filed a proffer on award of compensation (“Proffer”) indicating petitioner should be awarded $100,000.00. Proffer at 1. In the Proffer, respondent represented that petitioner agrees with the proffered award. Based on the
1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the undersigned intends to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website,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). record as a whole, the undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to an award as stated in the Proffer.
Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Proffer, the undersigned awards petitioner a lump sum payment of $100,000.00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner, Douglas A. Freedman. 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.
2 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS _________________________________________ DOUGLAS A. FREEDMAN, ) ) ) ECF Petitioner, ) ) v. ) No. 16-1357V ) Chief Special Master SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN ) Nora Beth Dorsey SERVICES, ) ) Respondent. ) )
RESPONDENT’S PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION
On October 18, 2016, Douglas Freedman (“petitioner”) filed a petition for vaccine injury
compensation alleging that he suffered a left shoulder injury related to vaccine administration
(“SIRVA”), which was caused-in-fact by an influenza (“flu”) vaccination administered on October
23, 2013. Respondent filed his Rule 4(c) Report conceding entitlement to compensation on
March 23, 2017. The Chief Special Master issued a Ruling on Entitlement on March 24, 2017.
I. Items of Compensation
Based upon the evidence of record, respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded
$100,000.00, which represents all elements of compensation to which petitioner would be entitled
under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). 1 Petitioner agrees.
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.
1 II. Form of the Award
The parties recommend that the compensation provided to petitioner should be made
through a lump sum payment of $100,000.00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner. 2
Petitioner agrees.
Respectfully submitted,
CHAD A. READLER Acting Assistant Attorney General
C. SALVATORE D’ALESSIO Acting Director Torts Branch, Civil Division
CATHARINE E. REEVES Deputy Director Torts Branch, Civil Division
HEATHER L. PEARLMAN Assistant Director Torts Branch, Civil Division
s/Lisa A. Watts LISA A. WATTS Senior Trial Attorney Torts Branch, Civil Division U.S. Department of Justice P.O. Box 146 Benjamin Franklin Station Washington, D.C. 20044-0146 Tel.: (202) 616-4099
DATED: September 5, 2017
2 Petitioner is a competent adult. Proof of guardianship is not required in this case. 2
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Freedman v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/freedman-v-secretary-of-health-and-human-services-uscfc-2018.