VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_13-vv-00649
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_13-vv-00649
Petitioner: Dawayne Rowell
Filed: 2014-12-16
Decided: 2015-09-08
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2010-10-16
Condition: Transverse Myelitis
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 185789

AI-assisted case summary:
Dawayne Rowell filed a petition on December 16, 2014, seeking compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. He alleged that he suffered from Transverse Myelitis (TM) and its sequelae as a result of receiving an influenza vaccine on October 16, 2010. The respondent denied that the flu vaccine caused Petitioner's TM or any other injury. Despite maintaining their positions, both parties agreed to settle the case through a stipulation filed on December 15, 2014. The court adopted this stipulation as its decision, awarding Petitioner a lump sum of $165,000.00 for all damages. Subsequently, on August 13, 2015, the parties filed another joint stipulation regarding attorney's fees and costs. The court approved an award of $20,289.06 for attorney's fees and $500.00 for reimbursable costs, payable jointly to Petitioner and his counsel, and solely to Petitioner, respectively. The total compensation awarded to Dawayne Rowell was $185,789.06.

Theory of causation field:
unclear

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_13-vv-00649-0
Date issued/filed: 2015-02-02
Pages: 7
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 12/16/2014) regarding 22 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer Signed by Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (ay) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:13-vv-00649-UNJ Document 26 Filed 02/02/15 Page 1 of 7
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 13-649V
(Not to be published)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*
DAWAYNE ROWELL, *
*
Petitioner, * Filed: December 16, 2014
*
v. * Decision by Stipulation; Damages;
* Influenza (“flu”) Vaccine;
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Transverse Myelitis (“TM”).
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Ramon Rodriguez , Rawls, McNelis and Mitchell, P.C., Richmond, VA, for Petitioner.
Jennifer L. Reynaud, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1
On September 6, 2013, Dawayne Rowell filed a petition seeking compensation under the
National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.2 Petitioner alleges that as a result of receiving
the influenza (“flu”) vaccine on October 16, 2010, he suffered from Transverse Myelitis (“TM”)
and its sequelae.
Respondent denies that the flu vaccine caused Petitioner’s TM and residual effects.
Respondent further denies that the flu vaccine caused Petitioner any other injury or his current
1 Because this ruling contains a reasoned explanation for my action in this case, it will be posted 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 42 U.S.C. §
300aa-12(d)(4)(B), however, the parties may object to the inclusion of certain kinds of confidential information. To
do so, Vaccine Rule 18(b) provides that 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 ruling will be available to the public.
Id.
2 The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program comprises 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.A. ' 300aa-10 – 34 (2006))
[hereinafter “Vaccine Act” or “the Act”]. Individual sections references hereafter will be to ' 300aa of the Act.

Case 1:13-vv-00649-UNJ Document 26 Filed 02/02/15 Page 2 of 7
condition. Nonetheless both parties, while maintaining their above-stated positions, agreed in a
stipulation (filed December 15, 2014) that the issues before them can be settled, and that a
decision should be entered awarding Petitioner compensation.
I have reviewed the file, and based upon that review, I conclude that the parties’
stipulation (as attached hereto) is reasonable. I therefore adopt it as my decision in awarding
damages on the terms set forth therein.
The stipulation awards:
 A lump sum of $165,000.00 in the form of a check payable to Petitioner.
Stipulation ¶ 8. This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available
under 42 U.S.C. ' 300aa-15(a).
I approve a Vaccine Program award in the requested amounts set forth above to be made
to Petitioner. In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the
clerk of the court is directed to enter judgment herewith.3
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ Brian H. Corcoran
Brian H. Corcoran
Special Master
3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by each filing (either jointly or
separately) a notice renouncing their right to seek review.
2

CCaassee 11::1133--vvvv--0000664499--UUNNJJ DDooccuummeenntt 2216 FFiilleedd 1022//1052//1145 PPaaggee 13 ooff 57

CCaassee 11::1133--vvvv--0000664499--UUNNJJ DDooccuummeenntt 2216 FFiilleedd 1022//1052//1145 PPaaggee 24 ooff 57

CCaassee 11::1133--vvvv--0000664499--UUNNJJ DDooccuummeenntt 2216 FFiilleedd 1022//1052//1145 PPaaggee 35 ooff 57

CCaassee 11::1133--vvvv--0000664499--UUNNJJ DDooccuummeenntt 2216 FFiilleedd 1022//1052//1145 PPaaggee 46 ooff 57

CCaassee 11::1133--vvvv--0000664499--UUNNJJ DDooccuummeenntt 2216 FFiilleedd 1022//1052//1145 PPaaggee 57 ooff 57

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 2: USCOURTS-cofc-1_13-vv-00649-1
Date issued/filed: 2015-09-08
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 8/17/2015) regarding 29 DECISION Fees Stipulation. Signed by Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (ag) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:13-vv-00649-UNJ Document 32 Filed 09/08/15 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 13-649V
(Not to be published)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*
DAWAYNE ROWELL, *
* Filed: August 17, 2015
Petitioner, *
* Decision by Stipulation; Attorney’s
v. * Fees & Costs
*
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND *
HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Ramon Rodriguez, III, Rawls, McNelis and Mitchell, P.C., Richmond, VA, for Petitioner
Althea Walker Davis, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent
ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS DECISION1
On September 6, 2013, Dawayne Rowell filed a petition seeking compensation under the
National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. On December 15, 2014, the parties filed a
stipulation detailing an amount to be awarded to Petitioner. I subsequently issued a decision
finding the parties’ stipulation to be reasonable and granting Petitioner the award outlined by the
stipulation.
On August 13, 2015, counsel for both parties filed another joint stipulation, this time in
regards to attorney’s fees and costs. The parties have stipulated that Petitioner’s counsel should
receive a lump sum of $20,289.06, in the form of a check payable to Petitioner and Petitioner’s
1 Because this decision contains a reasoned explanation for my actions in this case, I will post it 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 (Dec. 17, 2002) (current version at 44 U.S.C. § 3501 (2014)). As provided by 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-
12(d)(4)(B), however, the parties may object to the published decision’s inclusion of certain kinds of confidential
information. Specifically, under Vaccine Rule 18(b), each party has fourteen 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 whole decision will be available to
the public. Id.

Case 1:13-vv-00649-UNJ Document 32 Filed 09/08/15 Page 2 of 2
counsel. This amount represents a sum to which Respondent does not object. In addition, and in
compliance with General Order No. 9, Petitioner has represented that he incurred $500.00 in
reimbursable costs in proceeding on this petition.
I approve the requested amount for attorney’s fees and costs as reasonable. Accordingly,
an award should be made in the form of checks in the following amounts:
 $20,289.06 payable jointly to Petitioner and Petitioner’s counsel, Ramon
Rodriguez, III, Esq.; and
 $500.00 payable solely to Petitioner.
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.