VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_13-vv-00127
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_13-vv-00127
Petitioner: Darlene Hehl
Filed: 2013-02-19
Decided: 2014-10-22
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2011-10-18
Condition: Miller Fisher variant of Guillain-Barré syndrome
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 120000

AI-assisted case summary:
Darlene Hehl filed a petition on February 19, 2013, alleging that an influenza (flu) vaccination she received on October 18, 2011, caused her to develop the Miller Fisher variant of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS). She further alleged that she experienced residual effects of this injury for more than six months. The respondent denied that the flu vaccine caused petitioner's GBS or any other injury. However, on October 1, 2014, both parties filed a joint stipulation to settle the case. Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey reviewed the stipulation, found it reasonable, and adopted it as the decision of the Court. Petitioner was awarded a lump sum of $120,000.00, payable to her, as compensation for all damages available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). Danielle Anne Strait of Maglio Christopher and Toale, PA, represented the petitioner, and Julia Wernett McInerny of the United States Department of Justice represented the respondent. The public decision does not describe the onset of symptoms, specific clinical details, diagnostic tests, treatments, or expert witnesses.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Darlene Hehl alleged that an influenza vaccine administered on October 18, 2011, caused her to develop the Miller Fisher variant of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS), with residual effects lasting more than six months. Respondent denied causation. The parties reached a joint stipulation on October 1, 2014, and Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey adopted it as the decision. Petitioner was awarded $120,000.00. Attorneys for petitioner were Danielle Anne Strait and colleagues from Maglio Christopher and Toale, PA. Attorney for respondent was Julia Wernett McInerny. The public decision does not detail the specific mechanism of injury, expert testimony, or the basis for the stipulation beyond the parties' agreement.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_13-vv-00127-0
Date issued/filed: 2014-10-22
Pages: 7
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 10/01/2014) regarding 40 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer Signed by Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey. (tlj) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:13-vv-00127-UNJ Document 45 Filed 10/22/14 Page 1 of 7
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 13-127V
Filed: October 1, 2014
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * UNPUBLISHED
DARLENE HEHL, *
* Special Master Dorsey
Petitioner, *
*
v. * Joint Stipulation on Damages;
* Influenza (Flu)Vaccine; Guillain-
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Barré syndrome (GBS).
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Danielle Anne Strait, Maglio Christopher and Toale, PA, Washington, DC, for petitioner.
Julia Wernett McInerny, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
DECISION1
On February 19, 2013, Darlene Hehl (“petitioner”) filed a petition pursuant to the
National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.2 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to -34 (2006).
Petitioner alleged that she suffered from the Miller Fisher variant of Guillain-Barré syndrome
that was caused in fact by an influenza (“flu”) vaccine that was administered to her on October
18, 2011. See Petition at 1. Petitioner further alleged that she experienced the residual effects of
these injuries for more than six months. Id. at 2.
On October 1, 2014, the parties filed a stipulation, stating that a decision should be
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

Case 1:13-vv-00127-UNJ Document 45 Filed 10/22/14 Page 2 of 7
entered awarding compensation.
Respondent denies that the flu vaccine caused petitioner’s GBS or any other injury.
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 stipulated that petitioner shall receive the following compensation:
A lump sum of $120,000.00, in the form of a check payable to petitioner. This
amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available under 42 U.S.C.
§ 300aa-15(a).
Stipulation ¶ 8.
The undersigned approves the requested amount for petitioner’s 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 1:13-vv-00127-UNJ Document 45 Filed 10/22/14 Page 3 of 7

Case 1:13-vv-00127-UNJ Document 45 Filed 10/22/14 Page 4 of 7

Case 1:13-vv-00127-UNJ Document 45 Filed 10/22/14 Page 5 of 7

Case 1:13-vv-00127-UNJ Document 45 Filed 10/22/14 Page 6 of 7

Case 1:13-vv-00127-UNJ Document 45 Filed 10/22/14 Page 7 of 7