McGraw v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
This text of McGraw v. Secretary of Health and Human Services (McGraw 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. 12-282V Filed: March 22, 2017
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * DAWN MCGRAW, * UNPUBLISHED * Petitioner, * v. * Decision on Joint Stipulation; * Guillain Barré Syndrome (“GBS”); SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Hepatitis A (“Hep A”) Vaccine and AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Hepatitis B (“Hep B”) Vaccine. * Respondent. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Franklin Caldwell, Jr., Esq., Maglio, Christopher & Toale, Sarasota, FL, for petitioner. Lisa Watts, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1
Roth, Special Master:
On May 3, 2012, Petitioner (“Ms. McGraw,” or “petitioner”) filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.2 Petitioner alleges that she developed Guillain Barré Syndrome (“GBS”) as a result of receiving a Hepatitis A and/or Hepatitis B vaccination on October 12, 2010. See Stipulation, filed Mar. 22, 2017, at ¶¶ 1-4. Respondent denies that the Hepatitis A and/or Hepatitis B vaccines caused petitioner’s injury. Stipulation at ¶ 6.
1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I intend to post this decision on the United States Court of Federal Claims’ website, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, § 205, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (codified as amended at 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012)). In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), a party has 14 days to identify and move to delete medical or other information, that satisfies the criteria in 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(d)(4)(B). Further, consistent with the rule requirement, a motion for redaction must include a proposed redacted decision. If, upon review, I agree that the identified material fits within the requirements of that provision, I will delete such material from public access. 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 Nevertheless, the parties have agreed to settle the case. On March 22, 2017, the parties filed a joint stipulation agreeing to settle this case and describing the settlement terms. Respondent agrees to issue the following payment:
A lump sum of $365,840.40 in the form of a check payable to petitioner, Dawn McGraw. This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available under § 300aa-15(a).
I adopt the parties’ stipulation attached hereto, and award compensation in the amount and on the terms set forth therein. The clerk of the court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this decision.3
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ Mindy Michaels Roth Mindy Michaels Roth Special Master
3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by each party filing a 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
McGraw v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcgraw-v-secretary-of-health-and-human-services-uscfc-2017.