James E. Smith v. HHS - Influenza, Guillain-Barré Syndrome (2014)
Case summary [AI summaries can sometimes make mistakes]
James E. Smith filed a petition on August 28, 2013, alleging that a trivalent influenza (flu) vaccination he received on October 4, 2010, caused him to develop Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) with residual effects lasting more than six months.
Respondent denied that the flu vaccine caused petitioner's GBS or any other injury. The parties, represented by Michael S.
Pemberton of Pemberton & Scott, PLLP for the petitioner and Tara J. Kilfoyle of the U.S.
Department of Justice for the respondent, agreed to a joint stipulation filed on April 21, 2014. Special Master Christian J.
Moran reviewed the stipulation and found it reasonable, adopting it as the decision of the Court. As part of the stipulation, Mr.
Smith received a lump sum of $60,000.00, representing compensation for all damages available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). Subsequently, on July 22, 2014, the parties filed a stipulation concerning attorneys' fees and costs.
Mr. Smith sought $14,495.92 in fees and costs for his counsel, an amount to which the respondent did not object after an amended application.
Special Master Moran awarded this amount in a decision filed on September 2, 2014, as a lump sum payable to both the petitioner and his attorney, Michael S. Pemberton, for attorneys' fees and litigation costs available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(e).
Theory of causation
Petitioner James E. Smith alleged that a trivalent influenza vaccine received on October 4, 2010, caused Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS), an injury listed on the Vaccine Injury Table, with residual effects lasting more than six months. Respondent denied causation. The parties entered into a joint stipulation on April 21, 2014, which Special Master Christian J. Moran adopted. The stipulation resulted in an award of $60,000.00 for damages. A subsequent stipulation on July 22, 2014, addressed attorneys' fees and costs, with Special Master Moran awarding $14,495.92 to petitioner and his counsel, Michael S. Pemberton, as respondent did not object to the amended amount. The public decision does not describe the specific medical onset, symptoms, diagnostic tests, treatments, or expert witnesses, nor does it detail the mechanism of causation.
Source PDFs
USCOURTS-cofc-1_13-vv-00617