Hannon v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

CourtUnited States Court of Federal Claims
DecidedMay 14, 2025
Docket23-0197V
StatusPublished

This text of Hannon v. Secretary of Health and Human Services (Hannon 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
Hannon v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, (uscfc 2025).

Opinion

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

********************** KRYSTEL HANNON, * No. 23-197V * * Petitioner, * * Special Master Christian J. Moran v. * * Filed: April 21, 2025 SECRETARY OF HEALTH * AND HUMAN SERVICES, * * Respondent. * **********************

Bridget Candace McCullough, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for Petitioner; Felicia Langel, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

UNPUBLISHED DECISION AWARDING ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS 1

Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(e), petitioner has requested a total of $20,319.21 in attorneys’ fees and costs. The undersigned tentatively found that petitioner requested a reasonable amount and was entitled to the full amount

1 Because this Decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action taken in this case, it must be made publicly accessible and will be posted on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, and/or at https://www.govinfo.gov/app/collection/uscourts/national/cofc, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2018) (Federal Management and Promotion of Electronic Government Services). This means the Decision will be available to anyone with access to the internet. In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), the parties have 14 days to identify and move to redact medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. Any changes will appear in the document posted on the website. requested. The undersigned allowed respondent an opportunity to comment. Respondent did not interpose any objections within the time permitted.

Petitioner’s attorney and attorney staff have requested hourly rates that are consistent with the rates previously awarded and/or reasonable. The number of hours is reasonable. Thus, the amount requested is reasonable.

Petitioner is awarded $20,319.21. This amount shall be paid through an ACH deposit to petitioner’s counsel’s IOLTA account for prompt disbursement. 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.

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

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.

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

Related

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Hannon v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hannon-v-secretary-of-health-and-human-services-uscfc-2025.