Sexton v. Hhs

• Court: United States Court of Federal Claims
• Decided: March 20, 2015
• Docket: 99-453
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 99-453V Filed: February 24, 2015

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * UNPUBLISHED JACK SEXTON and PEDORA E. ZACHARY* as Administrators for the Estate of N.Z.S., * deceased * * Special Master Dorsey Petitioners, * * v. * * Joint Stipulation on Damages; SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Hepatitis B vaccine; Death AND HUMAN SERVICES, * * Respondent. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Ronald C. Homer, Conway, Homer & Chin-Caplan, P.C., Boston, MA, for petitioners. Ryan D. Pyles, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

DECISION1

On July 13, 1999, Jack Sexton and Pedora Zachary (“petitioners”) filed a petition on behalf of their minor child, N.Z.S., pursuant to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.2 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to -34 (2006). Petitioners alleged that as a result of receiving a Hepatitis B (“Hep B”) vaccine on or about October 8, 1992, N.Z.S. suffered from an injury that resulted in his death on October 10, 1992. See Petition at ¶ 3.

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 (2006)). 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 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 (2006) (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.

1 On February 24, 2015, the parties filed a stipulation in which they state that a decision should be entered awarding compensation. Respondent denies that the Hep B vaccine caused N.Z.S.’s alleged injury and/or any other injury, and denies that N.Z.S.’s death occurred as a result of a vaccine-related injury. Stipulation at ¶ 6. Nevertheless, the parties agree to the joint stipulation, attached hereto as Appendix A. The undersigned finds the stipulation reasonable and adopts it as the decision of the Court in awarding damages, on the terms set forth therein.

The parties stipulate that petitioner shall receive the following compensation:

A lump sum of $30,000.00, in the form of a check payable to petitioners, Jack Sexton and Pedora E. Zachary, as representatives of the Estate of N.Z.S. This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a).

Id. at ¶ 8.

The undersigned approves the requested amount for petitioners’ compensation. Accordingly, an award should be made consistent with the stipulation.

In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the clerk of the court SHALL ENTER JUDGMENT in accordance with the terms of the parties’ stipulation.3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Nora Beth Dorsey Nora Beth Dorsey Special Master

3 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 Case 1:99-vv-00453-UNJ Document 200 Filed 02/24/15 Page 1 of 5 Case 1:99-vv-00453-UNJ Document 200 Filed 02/24/15 Page 2 of 5 Case 1:99-vv-00453-UNJ Document 200 Filed 02/24/15 Page 3 of 5 Case 1:99-vv-00453-UNJ Document 200 Filed 02/24/15 Page 4 of 5 Case 1:99-vv-00453-UNJ Document 200 Filed 02/24/15 Page 5 of 5