VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_14-vv-00546
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_14-vv-00546
Petitioner: Veronica Ettel
Filed: 2014-06-26
Decided: 2015-07-28
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2013-01-23
Condition: transverse myelitis
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 75816

AI-assisted case summary:
Veronica Ettel filed a petition on June 26, 2014, seeking compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. She alleged that she developed transverse myelitis (TM) as a result of an influenza vaccine received on January 23, 2013. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, denied that the vaccine caused Petitioner's condition. Despite maintaining their respective positions, both parties agreed to settle the case through a stipulation filed on May 22, 2015. Special Master Brian H. Corcoran reviewed the stipulation and found it to be reasonable, adopting it as his decision. The stipulation awarded Veronica Ettel a lump sum of $47,500.00, representing compensation for all damages available under the program. A separate stipulation regarding attorney's fees and costs was filed on July 6, 2015. Petitioner requested reimbursement for attorney's fees and costs in the amount of $28,316.62, which the respondent did not object to. Special Master Corcoran approved this amount as reasonable. The award for attorney's fees and costs was to be made in the form of a check payable jointly to Petitioner and her counsel, Alison H. Haskins. The public decision does not describe the onset of symptoms, specific medical tests, treatments, or the mechanism of causation. Judgment was to be entered in accordance with the terms of the stipulations.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Veronica Ettel alleged that she developed transverse myelitis (TM) as a result of an influenza vaccine received on January 23, 2013. Respondent denied causation. The parties reached a settlement via stipulation, approved by Special Master Brian H. Corcoran on July 28, 2015. The stipulation awarded Petitioner $47,500.00 for all damages and $28,316.62 for attorney's fees and costs, payable jointly to Petitioner and counsel Alison H. Haskins. The public decision does not detail the specific theory of causation, medical experts, or the mechanism by which the vaccine allegedly caused the TM.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_14-vv-00546-0
Date issued/filed: 2015-07-28
Pages: 7
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 05/22/2015) Regarding 21 DECISION Stipulation Signed by Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (ay) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:14-vv-00546-UNJ Document 29 Filed 07/28/15 Page 1 of 7
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 14-546V
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*
VERONICA ETTEL, *
* Filed: May 22, 2015
Petitioner, *
*
v. * Decision by Stipulation; Damages;
* Influenza (“Flu”) Vaccine; Transverse
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Myelitis (“TM”)
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Alison H. Haskins, Maglio Christopher and Toale, PA, Sarasota, FL, for Petitioner.
Justine E. Walters, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1
On June 26, 2014, Veronica Ettel filed a petition seeking compensation under the National
Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (the “Vaccine Program”).2 Petitioner alleges that she
developed transverse myelitis (“TM”) as a result of the influenza (“flu”) vaccine that she received
on January 23, 2013.
Respondent denies that the flu vaccine caused Petitioner’s TM or any other injury or her
current condition. Nonetheless both parties, while maintaining their above-stated positions, agreed
in a stipulation (filed May 22, 2015) that the issues before them could be settled, and that a decision
should be entered awarding Petitioner compensation.
1 Because this decision 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 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 decision 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 at 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-10 through 34 (2006))
[hereinafter “Vaccine Act” or “the Act”]. Individual sections references hereafter will be to § 300aa of the Act.

Case 1:14-vv-00546-UNJ Document 29 Filed 07/28/15 Page 2 of 7
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 $47,500.00 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

Case 1:14-vv-00546-UNJ Document 29 Filed 07/28/15 Page 3 of 7

Case 1:14-vv-00546-UNJ Document 29 Filed 07/28/15 Page 4 of 7

Case 1:14-vv-00546-UNJ Document 29 Filed 07/28/15 Page 5 of 7

Case 1:14-vv-00546-UNJ Document 29 Filed 07/28/15 Page 6 of 7

Case 1:14-vv-00546-UNJ Document 29 Filed 07/28/15 Page 7 of 7

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 2: USCOURTS-cofc-1_14-vv-00546-1
Date issued/filed: 2015-07-28
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 07/06/2015) Regarding 26 DECISION Fees Stipulation Signed by Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (ay) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:14-vv-00546-UNJ Document 30 Filed 07/28/15 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 14-546V
(Not to be Published)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*
VERONICA ETTEL, *
* Filed: July 6, 2015
Petitioner, *
*
v. * Decision by Stipulation; Attorney’s
* Fees and Costs
SECRETARY OF HEALTH *
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Alison H. Haskins, Maglio Christopher and Toale, PA, Sarasota, FL, for Petitioner.
Justine E. Walters, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS DECISION1
On June 26, 2014, Veronica Ettel filed a petition seeking compensation under the National
Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.2 ECF No. 1. Thereafter, on May 22, 2015, the parties filed
a stipulation settling the case and detailing the amount to be awarded to Petitioner. ECF No. 20. I
subsequently issued a decision finding the parties’ stipulation to be reasonable and granting
Petitioner an award as outlined in the stipulation. ECF No. 21.
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.
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 at 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-10 through 34 (2012))
[hereinafter “Vaccine Act” or “the Act”]. Individual sections references hereafter will be to § 300aa of the Act.

Case 1:14-vv-00546-UNJ Document 30 Filed 07/28/15 Page 2 of 2
On July 6, 2015, the parties filed another stipulation, this time regarding attorney’s fees
and costs. ECF No. 25. Petitioner requests reimbursement of attorney’s fees and costs in the
amount of $28,316.62. Id. This amount represents a sum to which Respondent does not object. Id.
In addition, and in compliance with General Order No. 9, Petitioner’s counsel represents that
Petitioner did not personally incurred any expenses in litigating this case. Id.
I approve the requested amount for attorney’s fees and costs as reasonable. Accordingly,
an award of $28,316.62 should be made in the form of a check payable jointly to Petitioner and
Petitioner’s counsel, Alison H. Haskins, Esq. Payment of this amounts represents all attorney’s
fees and costs available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(e). 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/ 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