VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_12-vv-00396
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_12-vv-00396
Petitioner: KATHRYN GODLEWSKI
Filed: 2012-06-20
Decided: 2014-01-31
Vaccine: 
Vaccination date: 
Condition: 
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 14589

AI-assisted case summary:
Kathryn Godlewski filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program on June 20, 2012. The parties filed a proffer detailing an award amount on July 12, 2013, which was approved by the special master. On January 31, 2014, the parties filed a joint stipulation for attorney's fees and costs. Petitioner's counsel was to receive $14,128.07, and Petitioner was to receive $461.10 for personal costs. The special master approved these amounts as reasonable. Judgment was to be entered in accordance with the stipulation.

Theory of causation field:
unclear

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_12-vv-00396-0
Date issued/filed: 2014-02-21
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION: (Signed by Special Master Brian Corcoran.)(mpj) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:12-vv-00396-UNJ Document 31 Filed 02/21/14 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 12-396V
(Not to be published)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*
KATHRYN GODLEWSKI *
* Filed: January 31, 2014
Petitioner, *
* Decision by Stipulation; Attorney’s
v. * Fees & Costs
*
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND *
HUMAN SERVICES *
*
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Clifford Shoemaker, Vienna, VA, for Petitioner
Ann Martin, Washington, DC, for Respondent
ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS DECISION1
On June 20, 2012, Petitioner filed a petition seeking compensation under the National
Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (Athe Vaccine Program@). On July 12, 2013, the parties
filed a proffer detailing an amount to be awarded to Petitioner. The special master previously
assigned to this case subsequently issued a decision finding the parties’ proffer to be reasonable
and granting Petitioner the award outlined by the proffer.
On January 31, 2014, counsel for both parties filed a joint stipulation concerning
attorney’s fees and costs. The parties have stipulated that Petitioner’s counsel should receive a
1 Because this decision contains a reasoned explanation for my action in this case, I will 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 (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). Otherwise, “the entire” decision will be
available to the public. Id.

Case 1:12-vv-00396-UNJ Document 31 Filed 02/21/14 Page 2 of 2
lump sum of $14,128.07, in the form of a check payable to Petitioner and Petitioner’s counsel.
This amount represents a sum to which Respondent does not object.
Additionally, the parties have stipulated that Petitioner should receive a lump sum of
$461.10, in the form of a check payable to Petitioner alone. This amount represents the costs
personally borne by Petitioner to which Respondent does not object.
I approve the requested amount for attorney’s fees and costs as reasonable. Accordingly,
an award in the amount of $14,128.07 should be made in the form of a check payable jointly to
Petitioner and Petitioner’s counsel, Clifford J. Shoemaker. In addition, an award in the amount of
$461.10 should be made in the form of a check payable to Petitioner alone. 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.2
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ Brian H. Corcoran
Brian H. Corcoran
Special Master
2 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by filing a joint
notice renouncing their right to seek review.