VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_12-vv-00702
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_12-vv-00702
Petitioner: B.E.R.
Filed: 2012-10-17
Decided: 2015-11-05
Vaccine: DTaP
Vaccination date: 2012-04-05
Condition: seizures
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 66864

AI-assisted case summary:
On October 17, 2012, James Reeves, on behalf of B.E.R., filed a petition alleging that the DTaP vaccine, received on or about April 5, 2012, caused B.E.R. to suffer seizures and residual effects for more than six months. The DTaP vaccine is listed on the Vaccine Injury Table. The respondent denied that the vaccine caused the seizures. The parties reached a stipulation for compensation, which Special Master Christian J. Moran adopted. The stipulation awarded $66,864.94 to reimburse a lien for services rendered on behalf of B.E.R., payable jointly to the petitioner and the Treasurer of the State of Ohio. Petitioner agreed to endorse this payment to the Treasurer of the State of Ohio. An additional amount was awarded to purchase an annuity contract. The case was compensated based on the stipulation. Petitioner counsel was Anne C. Toale of Maglio Christopher and Toale. Respondent counsel was Jennifer Leigh Reynaud of the U.S. Department of Justice. The decision was filed on November 5, 2015.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner alleged that the DTaP vaccine, received on or about April 5, 2012, caused B.E.R. to suffer seizures and residual effects for more than six months. The DTaP vaccine is listed on the Vaccine Injury Table. Respondent denied causation. The parties reached a stipulation for compensation, which Special Master Christian J. Moran adopted. The stipulation awarded $66,864.94 for reimbursement of a lien for services rendered on behalf of B.E.R., payable jointly to the petitioner and the Treasurer of the State of Ohio, with petitioner agreeing to endorse the payment to the Treasurer. An additional amount was awarded to purchase an annuity contract. The public decision does not describe the specific mechanism of injury, expert testimony, or clinical details of the seizures or residual effects.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_12-vv-00702-0
Date issued/filed: 2015-11-05
Pages: 10
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 10/09/2015) regarding 78 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer. Signed by Special Master Christian J. Moran. (tpj) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:12-vv-00702-UNJ Document 80 Filed 11/05/15 Page 1 of 10
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
JAMES REEVES *
on behalf of B.E.R., * No. 12-702V
Petitioner, * Special Master Christian J. Moran
*
v. * Filed: October 9, 2015
*
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Stipulation; DTaP vaccine;
AND HUMAN SERVICES, * seizure.
*
Respondent. *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Anne C. Toale, Maglio Christopher and Toale, Sarasota, FL, for Petitioner;
Jennifer Leigh Reynaud, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
UNPUBLISHED DECISION1
On October 9, 2015, the parties filed a joint stipulation concerning the
petition for compensation filed by James Reeves, on behalf of B.E.R., on October
17, 2012. In his petition, petitioner alleged that the diphtheria-tetanus-acellur
pertussis (“DTaP”) vaccine, which is contained in the Vaccine Injury Table (the
“Table”), 42 C.F.R. §100.3(a), and which B.E.R. received on or about April 5,
2012, caused her to seizures. Petitioner further alleges that B.E.R. suffered the
residual effects of this injury for more than six months. Petitioner represents that
there has been no prior award or settlement of a civil action for damages on
B.E.R.’s behalf as a result of her condition.
Respondent denies that the DTaP vaccine caused B.E.R. to suffer seizures or
any other injury.
1 The E-Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (Dec. 17,
2002), requires that the Court post this decision on its website. Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 18(b),
the parties have 14 days to file a motion proposing redaction of medical information or other
information described in 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(d)(4). Any redactions ordered by the special
master will appear in the document posted on the website.

Case 1:12-vv-00702-UNJ Document 80 Filed 11/05/15 Page 2 of 10
Nevertheless, the parties agree to the joint stipulation, attached hereto as
Appendix A. The undersigned finds said stipulation reasonable and adopts it as the
decision of the Court in awarding damages, on the terms set forth therein.
Damages awarded in that stipulation include:
a. A lump sum payment of $66,864.94, which amount represents
reimbursement of a lien for services rendered on behalf of B.E.R., in
the form of a check payable jointly to petitioner and
Treasurer of the State of Ohio
Ohio Tort Recover Unit
350 Worthington Road, Suite G
Westerville, OH 43082
ATTN: Jeanny Blackledge
Case Number: 966733
Petitioner agrees to endorse this payment to the Treasurer of the
State of Ohio.
This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be
available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a), except as set forth in
paragraph b.
b. An amount sufficient to purchase the annuity contract described in
paragraph 10 of the stipulation paid to the life insurance company
from which the annuity will be purchased.
In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC, Appendix B,
the clerk is directed to enter judgment in case 12-702V according to this decision
and the attached stipulation.2
Any questions may be directed to my law clerk, Shannon Proctor, at (202)
357-6360.
2 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties can expedite entry of judgment by each
party filing a notice renouncing the right to seek review by a United States Court of Federal
Claims judge.
2

Case 1:12-vv-00702-UNJ Document 80 Filed 11/05/15 Page 3 of 10
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Christian J. Moran
Christian J. Moran
Special Master
3

Case 1:12-vv-00702-UNJ Document 80 Filed 11/05/15 Page 4 of 10

Case 1:12-vv-00702-UNJ Document 80 Filed 11/05/15 Page 5 of 10

Case 1:12-vv-00702-UNJ Document 80 Filed 11/05/15 Page 6 of 10

Case 1:12-vv-00702-UNJ Document 80 Filed 11/05/15 Page 7 of 10

Case 1:12-vv-00702-UNJ Document 80 Filed 11/05/15 Page 8 of 10

Case 1:12-vv-00702-UNJ Document 80 Filed 11/05/15 Page 9 of 10

Case 1:12-vv-00702-UNJ Document 80 Filed 11/05/15 Page 10 of 10