Ramsay v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

CourtUnited States Court of Federal Claims
DecidedMarch 28, 2017
Docket11-549
StatusUnpublished

This text of Ramsay v. Secretary of Health and Human Services (Ramsay 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
Ramsay v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, (uscfc 2017).

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS Filed: February 28, 2017

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * DONNA RAMSAY, * No. 11-549 * Petitioner, * Special Master Sanders * v. * Decision on Proffer; Damages; Human * Papillomavirus Vaccine (“HPV” or SECRETARY OF HEALTH * “Gardasil”); Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Arthritis (“sJIA”); Juvenile Rheumatoid * Arthritis (“JRA”). Respondent. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Patricia L. O’Dell, Beasley, Allen, et al., P.C., Montgomery, AL, for Petitioner. Darryl R. Wishard, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1

On August 30, 2011, Tina Ramsay filed a petition on behalf of her minor daughter, Donna Ramsay (“Petitioner”)2, pursuant to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.3 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to -34 (2012). Petitioner alleges that as a result of receiving human papillomavirus (“HPV” or “Gardasil”) vaccines on March 19, 2008 and June 30, 2008, she suffered

1 Because this decision contains a reasoned explanation for the undersigned’s action in this case, the undersigned intends to post this ruling on the website of the United States Court of Federal Claims, 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)). As provided by Vaccine Rule 18(b), each party has 14 days within which to request redaction “of any information furnished by that party: (1) that is a trade secret or commercial or financial in substance and is privileged or confidential; or (2) that includes medical files or similar files, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy.” Vaccine Rule 18(b). 2 Donna Ramsay, who has reached the age of majority since the petition was filed, has since been substituted as Petitioner. See Order, filed December 16, 2015, at 1. 3 The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program is set forth in Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755, codified as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to -34 (2012) (Vaccine Act or the Act). All citations in this decision to individual sections of the Vaccine Act are to 42 U.S.C.A. § 300aa. from systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis (“sJIA”)4. Petition (“Pet”) at 1.

On December 18, 2015, Special Master Hamilton-Fieldman issued a Ruling on Entitlement. ECF No. 67. She held that Petitioner’s theory and medical records satisfied the three- prong test in Althen v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 418 F.2d 1274, 1278 (Fed. Cir. 2005). Special Master Hamilton-Fieldman found that Petitioner had proven, by a preponderance of the evidence, that her sJIA was caused by her HPV vaccinations. Id. at 2.

On January 10, 2017, the case was reassigned to the undersigned. ECF No. 80. Petitioner filed a status report on February 13, 2017, informing the Court that the parties were finalizing the elements of an agreed upon Life Care plan. ECF No. 82.

On February 27, 2017, Respondent filed a Proffer on Award of Compensation (“Proffer”). Based on the 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 Proffer, attached as Appendix A, the undersigned awards Petitioner:

A. A lump sum payment of $1,274,658.50 in the form of a check payable to Petitioner, Donna Ramsay; and

B. An amount sufficient to purchase the annuity described in section II. B. of the Proffer, Appendix A, paid to the life insurance company from which the annuity will be purchased (the “Life Insurance Company”).

In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the clerk of the court SHALL ENTER JUDGMENT herewith.5

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Herbrina D. Sanders Herbrina D. Sanders Special Master

4 Throughout the record, Petitioner’s sJIA has alternatively been referred to as juvenile rheumatoid arthritis (“JRA”) and Still’s disease. These three terms refer to the same injury. See, e.g., Transcript at 39-40. 5 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment is 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

DONNA RAMSAY,

Petitioner,

v. No. 11-549V Special Master Sanders SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND ECF HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent.

RESPONDENT'S PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION

I. Items of Compensation

A. Life Care Items

Respondent engaged life care planner Shelly Kinney, MSN, RN, CCM, CNLP, and

petitioner engaged Maria Vargas, MS, CRC, CLCP, to provide an estimation of Donna Ramsay’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 on Entitlement, filed December 18, 2015. All

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

illustrated by the chart entitled Appendix A: Items of Compensation for Donna Ramsay, attached

hereto as Tab A. 1 Respondent proffers that Donna Ramsay should be awarded all items of

compensation set forth in the life care plan and illustrated by the chart attached at Tab A.

Petitioner agrees.

1 The chart at Tab A illustrates the annual benefits provided by the 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.

-1- B. Lost Earnings

The parties agree that based upon the evidence of record, Donna Ramsay has suffered

past loss of earnings and will suffer a loss of earnings in the future. Therefore, respondent

proffers that Donna Ramsay should be awarded lost earnings as provided under the Vaccine Act,

42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a)(3)(B). Respondent proffers that the appropriate award for Donna

Ramsay’s lost earnings is $983,618.55. Petitioner agrees.

C. Pain and Suffering

Respondent proffers that Donna Ramsay 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 her vaccine-related injury. Respondent proffers that petitioner should be

awarded past unreimbursable expenses in the amount of $3,246.94. Petitioner agrees.

E. Medicaid Lien

Petitioner represents that there are no Medicaid liens outstanding against her.

II. Form of the Award

The parties recommend that the compensation provided to Donna Ramsay should be

made through a combination of lump sum payments and future annuity payments as described

below, and request that the Special Master’s decision and the Court’s judgment award the

following: 2

A.

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

Related

United States v. George Clayton, Jr.
418 F.2d 1274 (Sixth Circuit, 1969)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Ramsay v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ramsay-v-secretary-of-health-and-human-services-uscfc-2017.