VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_14-vv-00900
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_14-vv-00900
Petitioner: Jennifer Nash
Filed: 2014-09-24
Decided: 2016-05-18
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2011-09-26
Condition: shoulder injury
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 40000

AI-assisted case summary:
Jennifer Nash filed a petition for compensation on September 24, 2014, alleging that she suffered a shoulder injury following her September 26, 2011 influenza vaccination. She claimed to have experienced residual effects for more than six months. The respondent denied that the influenza vaccine caused her alleged shoulder injury and pain, and also denied that she experienced residual effects for more than six months or that the vaccine caused any other injury. Despite these denials, the parties filed a joint stipulation on March 24, 2016, agreeing that compensation should be awarded. The Chief Special Master, Nora Beth Dorsey, found the stipulation reasonable and adopted it as the decision of the Court. Jennifer Nash was awarded a lump sum of $40,000.00 as compensation for all items of damages. The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, medical examinations, diagnostic tests, treatments, or the specific mechanism of injury. Petitioner was represented by Edward Kraus of the Law Offices of Chicago Kent, and respondent was represented by Adriana Teitel of the U.S. Department of Justice.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Jennifer Nash alleged a shoulder injury, specifically SIRVA, following her September 26, 2011 influenza vaccination, with residual effects lasting more than six months. Respondent denied causation and duration of effects. The parties filed a joint stipulation for compensation, which was adopted by Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey. Petitioner was awarded $40,000.00. The public decision does not detail the specific theory of causation, medical experts, or the mechanism of injury, but the condition alleged falls under the Special Processing Unit (SPU) for shoulder injuries related to vaccine administration (SIRVA).

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_14-vv-00900-0
Date issued/filed: 2016-05-18
Pages: 7
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 03/24/2016) regarding 35 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer (Signed by Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey.)(mpj) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:14-vv-00900-UNJ Document 43 Filed 05/18/16 Page 1 of 7
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 14-900V
Filed: March 24, 2016
UNPUBLISHED
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
JENNIFER NASH, *
*
Petitioner, * Joint Stipulation on Damages;
* Influenza;
V.
* Shoulder Injury (“SIRVA”);
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Special Processing Unit (“SPU”)
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Edward Kraus, Law Offices of Chicago Kent, Chicago, IL, for petitioner.
Adriana Teitel, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1
Dorsey, Chief Special Master:
On September 24, 2014, petitioner filed a petition for compensation under the
National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.,2 (the
“Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that she suffered a shoulder injury following receipt of
her September 26, 2011 influenza vaccination. Petition at 1; Stipulation, filed
3/24/2016, ¶ 4. Petitioner further alleges that she experienced the residual effects of
this injury for more than six months and that there has been no prior award or
settlement of a civil action for damages as a result of her condition. Stipulation¶¶ 4-5.
“Respondent denies that the flu vaccine caused petitioner’s alleged shoulder injury and
pain, and also denies that petitioner experienced the residual effects of her injury for
more than six months. Respondent further denies that the flu vaccine caused petitioner
any other injury or her current condition. ” Stipulation, ¶ 6.
1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the
undersigned intends to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in accordance with
the E-Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012)(Federal Management and Promotion of
Electronic Government Services). In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), petitioner has 14 days to
identify and move to redact medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute an
unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits
within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from public access.
2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for
ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. §
300aa (2012).

Case 1:14-vv-00900-UNJ Document 43 Filed 05/18/16 Page 2 of 7
Nevertheless, on March 24, 2016, the parties filed the attached joint stipulation,
stating that a decision should be entered awarding compensation. 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 $40,000.00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner.
Stipulation, ¶ 8. This amount represents compensation for all items of damages
that would be available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). Id.
The undersigned approves the requested amount for petitioner’s compensation.
In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the clerk of
the court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this decision.3
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Nora Beth Dorsey
Nora Beth Dorsey
Chief Special Master
3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice
renouncing the right to seek review.
2

Case 1:14-vv-00900-UNJ Document 43 Filed 05/18/16 Page 3 of 7

Case 1:14-vv-00900-UNJ Document 43 Filed 05/18/16 Page 4 of 7

Case 1:14-vv-00900-UNJ Document 43 Filed 05/18/16 Page 5 of 7

Case 1:14-vv-00900-UNJ Document 43 Filed 05/18/16 Page 6 of 7

Case 1:14-vv-00900-UNJ Document 43 Filed 05/18/16 Page 7 of 7