Towne v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

CourtUnited States Court of Federal Claims
DecidedJanuary 9, 2019
Docket16-1116
StatusUnpublished

This text of Towne v. Secretary of Health and Human Services (Towne 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
Towne v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, (uscfc 2019).

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 16-1116V Filed: November 19, 2018 UNPUBLISHED

BEVERLY TOWNE,

Petitioner, v. Special Processing Unit (SPU); Joint Stipulation on Damages; Tetanus SECRETARY OF HEALTH Diphtheria acellular Pertussis (Tdap) AND HUMAN SERVICES, Vaccine; Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA) Respondent.

Verne E. Paradie, Jr., Paradie, Sherman, et al., Lewiston, ME, for petitioner. Jennifer Leigh Reynaud, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master:

On September 9, 2016, Dr. Beverly Towne (“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”). Petitioner alleges that she suffered left shoulder injuries caused by a Tetanus Diphtheria acellular Pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccine she received on December 23, 2015. Petition at 1-2; Stipulation, filed November 19, 2018, at ¶ 4. Petitioner further alleges that she suffered the residual effects of her alleged injury for more than six months. Petition at 2; Stipulation at ¶ 4. “Respondent denies that petitioner’s alleged shoulder injury and residual effects were caused-in-fact by the Tdap vaccine. Respondent further denies that the Tdap vaccine caused petitioner any other injury or her current condition.” Stipulation at ¶ 6.

1 The undersigned intends to post this decision on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website. This means the decision will be available to anyone with access to the internet. 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. Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, undersigned is required 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). 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). Nevertheless, on November 19, 2018, the parties filed the attached joint stipulation, stating that a decision should be entered awarding compensation. The undersigned finds the stipulation reasonable and adopts it as the decision of the Court in awarding damages, on the terms set forth therein.

Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Stipulation, the undersigned awards the following compensation:

A lump sum of $70,000.00, in the form of a check payable to petitioner, Beverly Towne. Stipulation at ¶ 8. This amount represents compensation for all items of damages that would be available under § 15(a). Id.

The undersigned approves the requested amount for petitioner’s compensation. In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, 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.

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

Related

§ 300aa
42 U.S.C. § 300aa
§ 300aa-10
42 U.S.C. § 300aa-10
Purposes
44 U.S.C. § 3501
§ 300a
42 U.S.C. § 300a

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Towne v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/towne-v-secretary-of-health-and-human-services-uscfc-2019.