Watson v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 22-695V

CONNIE WATSON, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, v. Filed: May 10, 2024

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent.

Catherine Wallace Costigan, Maglio Christopher & Toale, PA, Washington, DC, for Petitioner.

Alexis B. Babcock, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

DECISION ON ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS 1

On June 21, 2022, Connie Watson 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 alleged that she suffered Guillain-Barré syndrome as a result of the of an influenza vaccination on October 31, 2019. Petition, ECF No. 1. On January 26, 2024, I issued a decision awarding compensation to Petitioner based on the parties’ stipulation. ECF No. 33.

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), Petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to redact medical or other inf ormation, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. If , upon review, I agree that the identified material fits within this definition, I will redact such material f rom public access. 2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for ease

of citation, all section ref erences to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2018). Petitioner has now filed a motion for attorney’s fees and costs, requesting an award of $ 88,077.65 (representing $85,968.00 in fees plus $2,109.65 in costs). Application for Fees and Costs (“Motion”) filed March 5, 2024, ECF No. 39. Furthermore, Petitioner filed a signed statement representing that Petitioner incurred $13.92 in personal out-of-pocket expenses. ECF No. 38-4.

Respondent reacted to the motion on March 5, 2024, reporting that he is satisfied that the statutory requirements for an award of attorney’s fees and costs are met in this case, but deferring resolution of the amount to be awarded to my discretion. Respondent’s Response to Motion at 2-3, ECF No. 39. Petitioner filed a reply asserting the request fees and costs as indicated in the Motion. ECF No. 40.

I have reviewed the billing records submitted with Petitioner’s requests and find a reduction in the amount of fees to be awarded appropriate, for the reason listed below.

ANALYSIS

The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorney’s fees and costs to successful claimants. Section 15(e). Counsel must submit fee requests that include contemporaneous and specific billing records indicating the service performed, the number of hours expended on the service, and the name of the person performing the service. See Savin v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 85 Fed. Cl. 313, 316-18 (2008). Counsel should not include in their fee requests hours that are “excessive, redundant, or otherwise unnecessary.” Saxton v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 3 F.3d 1517, 1521 (Fed. Cir. 1993) (quoting Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 434 (1983)). It is “well within the special master’s discretion to reduce the hours to a number that, in [her] experience and judgment, [is] reasonable for the work done.” Id. at 1522. Furthermore, the special master may reduce a fee request sua sponte, apart from objections raised by respondent and without providing a petitioner notice and opportunity to respond. See Sabella v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 86 Fed. Cl. 201, 209 (2009). A special master need not engage in a line-by-line analysis of petitioner’s fee application when reducing fees. Broekelschen v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 102 Fed. Cl. 719, 729 (2011).

The petitioner “bears the burden of establishing the hours expended, the rates charged, and the expenses incurred.” Wasson v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 24 Cl. Ct. 482, 484 (1991). The Petitioner “should present adequate proof [of the attorney’s fees and costs sought] at the time of the submission.” Wasson, 24 Cl. Ct. at 484 n.1. Petitioner’s counsel “should make a good faith effort to exclude from a fee request hours that are excessive, redundant, or otherwise unnecessary, just as a lawyer in private 2 practice ethically is obligated to exclude such hours from his fee submission.” Hensley, 461 U.S. at 434.

ATTORNEY FEES

The hourly rates requested for work performed through the end of 2023 are reasonable and consistent with prior determinations and shall therefore be adopted herein. The 2024 hourly rate requested by Attorney Catherine Costigan, however, requires adjustment.

Ms. Costigan was previously awarded the hourly rate of $395 for time billed in 2024, less than what is being requested herein. See Eckert v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. Servs., No. 22-1259, Slip Op, 50 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. April 3, 2024); and Lawrence v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. Servs., No. 23-0071, Slip Op, 43 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. April 16, 2024). I find no reason to deviate from the previously established rate. Accordingly, I reduce Ms. Costigan’s rate to be consistent with the rate she has been awarded for time billed in 2024. This results in a reduction of attorney’s fees to be awarded of $55.50. 3

ATTORNEY COSTS

Petitioner requests $ 2,109.65in overall costs. ECF No. 38-3. This amount is comprised of obtaining medical records, shipping costs, and the court’s filing fee. I have reviewed the requested costs and find them to be reasonable and shall award them in full.

CONCLUSION

The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorney’s fees and costs for successful claimants. Section 15(e). Accordingly, I hereby GRANT in part Petitioner’s Motion for attorney’s fees and costs. Petitioner is awarded the total amount of $88,036.07 4 as follows:

3 This amount consists of ($410 - $395 = $15 x 3.70 hrs.) = $55.50 4 This amount is intended to cover all legal expenses incurred in this matter. This award encompasses all charges by the attorney against a client, “advanced costs” as well as f ees f or legal services rendered. Furthermore, § 15(e)(3) prevents an attorney from charging or collecting fees (including costs) that would be in addition to the amount awarded herein. See generally Beck v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 924 F.2d 1029 (Fed. Cir.1991).

3 • A lump sum of $88,022.15, (representing $85,912.50 in fees plus $2,109.65 in costs), in the form of a check payable jointly to Petitioner and Petitioner’s counsel, and

• A lump sum of $13.92, representing reimbursement for Petitioner’s costs, in the form of a check payable to Petitioner.

Per Petitioner’s request, the check is to be forwarded to Maglio Christopher and Toale Law, 1605 Main Street, Suite 710, Sarasota Florida 34236. In the absenc e of a timely-filed motion for review (see Appendix B to the Rules of the Court), the Clerk of Court shall enter judgment in accordance with this Decision. 5

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Brian H. Corcoran Brian H. Corcoran Chief Special Master

5 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by f iling a joint notice renouncing their right to seek review. 4