VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_14-vv-00909
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_14-vv-00909
Petitioner: Pamela Boshart Lynch
Filed: 2014-09-26
Decided: 2017-01-11
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2011-09-29
Condition: acute disseminated encephalomyelitis
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 151000

AI-assisted case summary:
Pamela Boshart Lynch filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program on September 26, 2014. She alleged that an influenza vaccine administered on September 29, 2011, caused her to develop acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM) and suffer residual effects for more than six months. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, denied that the flu vaccine caused Petitioner's ADEM or any other injury. Despite this denial, the parties filed a joint stipulation for damages. Special Master Lisa Hamilton-Fieldman reviewed the stipulation and found it reasonable, adopting it as the decision of the Court. The stipulation awarded Pamela Boshart Lynch a lump sum of $151,000.00, payable by check to the petitioner, as compensation for all damages. The parties also agreed to waive their right to seek review, allowing for expedited judgment. Petitioner's counsel was Michael J. Williams of Cellino and Barnes, P.C. Respondent's counsel was Linda S. Renzi of the United States Department of Justice. The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, medical tests, treatments, or expert witnesses. The specific mechanism of causation was not detailed in the public decision.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Pamela Boshart Lynch alleged that an influenza vaccine administered on September 29, 2011, caused her to develop acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM) and suffer residual effects for more than six months. The respondent denied causation. The parties filed a joint stipulation for award, agreeing to a lump sum of $151,000.00 for all damages. The Special Master adopted the stipulation. The public decision does not detail the specific theory of causation, medical experts, or the mechanism by which the vaccine allegedly caused the injury. The decision was issued by Special Master Lisa Hamilton-Fieldman on January 11, 2017, with judgment entered in accordance with the stipulation. Petitioner was represented by Michael J. Williams, and Respondent by Linda S. Renzi.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_14-vv-00909-0
Date issued/filed: 2017-01-11
Pages: 7
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 12/09/2016) regarding 41 DECISION Stipulation. Signed by Special Master Herbrina Sanders. (Attachments: #1 Appendix A)(azc) Copy to parties. Modified on 7/11/2019 to include the attachment(s) in the main document for posting to the courts website (da).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:14-vv-00909-UNJ Document 45 Filed 01/11/17 Page 1 of 7
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 14-909V
Filed: December 9, 2016
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * UNPUBLISHED
PAMELA BOSHART LYNCH, *
* Special Master Hamilton-Fieldman
Petitioner, *
* Joint Stipulation on Damages;
v. * Influenza Vaccine; Acute
* Disseminated Encephalomyelitis.
SECRETARY OF HEALTH *
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Michael J. Williams, Cellino and Barnes, P.C., Buffalo, NY, for Petitioner.
Linda S. Renzi, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
DECISION1
On September 26, 2014, Pamela Boshart Lynch (“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 September 29, 2011, she developed acute disseminated encephalomyelitis
(“ADEM”). See Stipulation for Award at ¶ ¶ 1-4, filed Dec. 8, 2016. Petitioner further alleged
that she suffered residual effects of these injuries for more than six months. Id. at ¶ 4.
On December 8, 2016, the parties filed a stipulation in which they state that a decision
should be entered awarding compensation to Petitioner. Respondent denies that the flu vaccine
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-00909-UNJ Document 45 Filed 01/11/17 Page 2 of 7
caused Petitioner’s ADEM, or any other injury. 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 $151,000.00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner. 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-00909-UNJ Document 45 Filed 01/11/17 Page 3 of 7

Case 1:14-vv-00909-UNJ Document 45 Filed 01/11/17 Page 4 of 7

Case 1:14-vv-00909-UNJ Document 45 Filed 01/11/17 Page 5 of 7

Case 1:14-vv-00909-UNJ Document 45 Filed 01/11/17 Page 6 of 7

Case 1:14-vv-00909-UNJ Document 45 Filed 01/11/17 Page 7 of 7