VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_14-vv-00891
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_14-vv-00891
Petitioner: Richard Baldwin
Filed: 2014-09-22
Decided: 2016-10-11
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2013-12-06
Condition: Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA)
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 75000

AI-assisted case summary:
Richard Baldwin filed a petition for compensation on September 22, 2014, alleging that an influenza vaccine administered on or about December 6, 2013, caused him to suffer a Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA) with residual effects lasting more than six months. The respondent denied that the flu vaccination caused Petitioner's SIRVA or any other injury, and further denied that his current disabilities were a sequela of a vaccine-related injury. On October 11, 2016, the parties filed a joint stipulation for damages, agreeing that a decision should be entered awarding compensation to Petitioner. Special Master Lisa Hamilton-Fieldman found the stipulation reasonable and adopted it as the decision of the Court. Petitioner was awarded a lump sum of $75,000.00, payable to Richard Baldwin, as compensation for all damages. The parties agreed to expedite the entry of judgment by renouncing the right to seek review. Petitioner's counsel was Maximillian J. Muller of Muller Brazil, LLP, and respondent's counsel was Michael P. Milmoe of the United States Department of Justice. The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, medical examinations, diagnostic tests, treatments, or expert witnesses.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Richard Baldwin alleged that an influenza vaccine administered on or about December 6, 2013, caused a Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA) with residual effects lasting more than six months. Respondent denied causation. The parties filed a joint stipulation for damages, agreeing to an award of $75,000.00. Special Master Lisa Hamilton-Fieldman adopted the stipulation as the decision of the Court. The theory of causation is based on the Vaccine Injury Table, as indicated by the "Table" designation in the provided database fields. The public decision does not detail the specific mechanism of injury, expert testimony, or the breakdown of the award beyond the lump sum amount. Petitioner was represented by Maximillian J. Muller, and Respondent by Michael P. Milmoe. The decision was issued on October 11, 2016.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_14-vv-00891-0
Date issued/filed: 2016-10-11
Pages: 7
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 9/12/2016) regarding 38 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer. Signed by Special Master Lisa Hamilton-Fieldman. (ca1) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:14-vv-00891-UNJ Document 42 Filed 10/11/16 Page 1 of 7
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 14-891V
Filed: September 12, 2016
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * UNPUBLISHED
RICHARD BALDWIN *
*
* Special Master Hamilton-Fieldman
Petitioner, *
* Joint Stipulation on Damages;
v. * Influenza Vaccine; Shoulder Injury
* Related to Vaccine Administration.
SECRETARY OF HEALTH *
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Maximillian J. Muller, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for Petitioner.
Michael P. Milmoe, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
DECISION1
On September 22, 2014, Richard Baldwin (“Petitioner”) filed a petition for compensation
pursuant to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.2 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to -34
(2012). Petitioner alleged that as a result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine administered on or
about December 6, 2013, he suffered a Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration
(“SIRVA”). See Stipulation for Award at ¶ 2, 4, filed Sept. 12, 2016. Petitioner further alleged
that he suffered residual effects of this injury for more than six months. Id. at ¶ 4.
On September 12, 2016, the parties filed a stipulation in which they state that a decision
1 Because this decision contains a reasoned explanation for the undersigned’s action in this case,
the undersigned intends to post this decision on the website of the United States Court of Federal
Claims, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, codified as amended at 44 U.S.C. §
3501 note (2012). 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 1:14-vv-00891-UNJ Document 42 Filed 10/11/16 Page 2 of 7
should be entered awarding compensation to Petitioner. Respondent denies that the flu
vaccination caused Petitioner’s SIRVA or any other injury, and further denies that his current
disabilities are a sequela of a vaccine-related injury. Id. at ¶ 6. 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 stipulate that Petitioner shall receive the following compensation:
A lump sum of $75,000.00, in the form of a check payable to petitioner, Richard
Baldwin. This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be
available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a).
Id. at ¶ 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/ Lisa Hamilton-Fieldman
Lisa Hamilton-Fieldman
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 1:14-vv-00891-UNJ Document 42 Filed 10/11/16 Page 3 of 7

Case 1:14-vv-00891-UNJ Document 42 Filed 10/11/16 Page 4 of 7

Case 1:14-vv-00891-UNJ Document 42 Filed 10/11/16 Page 5 of 7

Case 1:14-vv-00891-UNJ Document 42 Filed 10/11/16 Page 6 of 7

Case 1:14-vv-00891-UNJ Document 42 Filed 10/11/16 Page 7 of 7