VICP Registry Case Source Bundle Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_13-vv-00715 Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_13-vv-00715 Petitioner: William Searcy Filed: 2013-09-23 Decided: 2015-04-29 Vaccine: Vaccination date: Condition: Outcome: compensated Award amount USD: AI-assisted case summary: William Searcy filed a petition on September 23, 2013, seeking compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. The specific vaccine(s), vaccination date(s), and alleged condition(s) are not detailed in the publicly available text. The parties filed a stipulation on September 10, 2014, regarding the compensation amount. Special Master Brian H. Corcoran issued a decision based on this stipulation. Subsequently, on April 3, 2015, the parties filed a joint stipulation concerning attorney's fees and costs. Special Master Corcoran issued a decision on April 8, 2015, approving a lump sum of $20,000.00 for attorney's fees and costs, payable jointly to William Searcy and his counsel, Thomas D. Robenalt, Esq. The respondent did not object to this amount. Petitioner represented that no reimbursable costs were incurred. The decision notes that it will be posted online, with provisions for parties to request redaction of confidential information. The Special Master ordered that judgment be entered in accordance with the stipulation unless a motion for review was filed. Theory of causation field: The public staging text for this case is sparse and only contains the decision regarding attorney's fees and costs. The specific vaccine(s), vaccination date(s), alleged injury, and the basis for the compensation award are not described in the available public text. A damages stipulation was filed on September 10, 2014, and Special Master Corcoran issued a decision based on it. Subsequently, a joint stipulation for attorney's fees and costs was filed on April 3, 2015. Special Master Corcoran approved attorney's fees and costs totaling $20,000.00, payable to Petitioner William Searcy and his counsel, Thomas D. Robenalt, Esq. The respondent did not object to this fee award. The specific theory of causation, medical experts, or clinical details supporting the compensation award are not present in the provided public text. Public staged source text: ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_13-vv-00715-0 Date issued/filed: 2015-04-29 Pages: 2 Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 04/08/2015) regarding 23 DECISION Fees Stipulation. Signed by Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (ag) Copy to parties. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:13-vv-00715-UNJ Document 25 Filed 04/29/15 Page 1 of 2 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 13-715V (Not to be published) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * WILLIAM SEARCY, * * Filed: April 8, 2015 Petitioner, * * Decision by Stipulation; Attorney’s v. * Fees & Costs * SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND * HUMAN SERVICES, * * Respondent. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Thomas D. Robenalt, Rocky River, OH, for Petitioner Gordon Shemin, Washington, DC, for Respondent ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS DECISION1 On September 23, 2013, William Searcy filed a petition seeking compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (Athe Vaccine Program@). On September 10, 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 April 3, 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 $20,000.00, in the form of a check payable to Petitioner and Petitioner’s 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 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(d)(4)(B), however, the parties may object to the posted decision’s inclusion of certain kinds of confidential information. Specifically, under 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 whole decision will be available to the public. (Id.) Case 1:13-vv-00715-UNJ Document 25 Filed 04/29/15 Page 2 of 2 counsel. This amount represents a sum to which respondent does not object. In addition, and in compliance with General Order #9, Petitioner has represented that he did incur any 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 a check in the amount of $20,000.00 payable jointly to Petitioner and Petitioner’s counsel, Thomas D. Robenalt, Esq. 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.