VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_14-vv-00923
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_14-vv-00923
Petitioner: Mary Van Kooten
Filed: 2016-06-20
Decided: 2016-08-08
Vaccine: Tdap
Vaccination date: 2013-05-17
Condition: transverse myelitis
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 220000

AI-assisted case summary:
Mary Van Kooten filed a petition on June 20, 2016, seeking compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. She alleged that on May 17, 2013, she received a tetanus-diphtheria-acellular-pertussis (Tdap) vaccine and subsequently developed transverse myelitis (TM). Ms. Van Kooten further alleged that she experienced residual effects from this injury for more than six months. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, denied that the Tdap vaccine caused Ms. Van Kooten's alleged TM or any other injury. Despite maintaining their respective positions, both parties agreed to settle the case through a stipulation filed on June 16, 2016. The stipulation proposed an award of compensation to Ms. Van Kooten. The Special Master reviewed the file and found the stipulation to be reasonable, adopting it as the decision in the case. The stipulation awarded Ms. Van Kooten a lump sum of $220,000.00, representing compensation for all damages available under the Act. The Special Master approved this award and directed the clerk of the court to enter judgment.

Theory of causation field:
unclear

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_14-vv-00923-0
Date issued/filed: 2016-08-08
Pages: 7
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 06/20/2016) Regarding 33 DECISION Stipulation (Signed by Special Master Brian H. Corcoran). (ay) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:14-vv-00923-UNJ Document 37 Filed 08/08/16 Page 1 of 7
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 14-923V
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*
MARY VAN KOOTEN, *
* Filed: June 20, 2016
Petitioner, *
* Decision by Stipulation; Damages;
v. * Tetanus-diphtheria-acellular-pertussis
* (“Tdap”) Vaccine; Transverse Myelitis
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * (“TM”).
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Alison H. Haskins, Maglio Christopher and Toale, PA, Sarasota, FL, for Petitioner.
Camille M. Collett, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1
On September 29, 2014, Mary Van Kooten filed a petition seeking compensation under the
National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (“Vaccine Program”).2 Petitioner alleges that she
suffered from transverse myelitis (“TM”) as a result of her May 17, 2013, receipt of the tetanus-
diphtheria-acellular-pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccine. Moreover, Petitioner alleges that she experienced
residual effects of this injury for more than six months.
Respondent denies that the Tdap vaccine caused Petitioner’s alleged TM or any other injury
or condition. Nonetheless both parties, while maintaining their above-stated positions, agreed in a
stipulation (filed on June 16, 2016) 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 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, 44 U.S.C. § 3501 (2012). As
provided by 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(d)(4)(B), however, the parties may object to the 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 Vaccine Program comprises Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100
Stat. 3758, codified as amended at 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10 through 34 (2012) (“Vaccine Act” or “the Act”). Individual
section references hereafter will be to § 300aa of the Act (but will omit that statutory prefix).

Case 1:14-vv-00923-UNJ Document 37 Filed 08/08/16 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 $220,000.00 in the form of a check payable to Petitioner.
Stipulation ¶ 8. This amounts represents compensation for all damages that would be available under
Section 15(a) of the Act.
I approve a Vaccine Program award in the requested amount 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-00923-UNJ Document 37 Filed 08/08/16 Page 3 of 7

Case 1:14-vv-00923-UNJ Document 37 Filed 08/08/16 Page 4 of 7

Case 1:14-vv-00923-UNJ Document 37 Filed 08/08/16 Page 5 of 7

Case 1:14-vv-00923-UNJ Document 37 Filed 08/08/16 Page 6 of 7

Case 1:14-vv-00923-UNJ Document 37 Filed 08/08/16 Page 7 of 7