Julie Mounts v. HHS - Varicella, chronic urticarial and chronic hives, as well as episodes of shakiness, chest pain, hyperventilating, depression, leg pain, headaches and related symptoms (2016)

On December 22, 2014, Julie Mounts filed a petition on behalf of her minor child, M.M., alleging that Varicella, DTaP, and Meningococcal vaccines administered on May 23, 2012, caused M.M. to suffer from chronic urticarial and chronic hives, as well as episodes of shakiness, chest pain, hyperventilating, depression, leg pain, and headaches. The petition was filed under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986.

The Special Master, Lisa Hamilton-Fieldman, issued a decision on March 25, 2016, dismissing the petition. This decision followed Petitioner's motion to dismiss, in which she stated that an investigation demonstrated an inability to prove entitlement to compensation and that proceeding further would be unreasonable and a waste of resources.

The Special Master found no evidence that M.M. suffered a "Table Injury" and no persuasive evidence, such as a medical expert's opinion, to establish that M.M.'s injuries were caused by the vaccination. The public decision does not describe the onset of symptoms, specific medical tests, or treatments.

Petitioner did not offer a medical opinion to support her claim, and the medical records were deemed insufficient to establish entitlement. The case was dismissed for insufficient proof, and no compensation was awarded.

Subsequently, Petitioner sought attorneys' fees and costs. On December 13, 2016, Judge Thomas C.

Wheeler reviewed the Special Master's decision denying these fees. The Petitioner had requested approximately $8,700 in fees.

The Respondent opposed the motion, arguing that the Petitioner lacked a reasonable basis for filing the claim. The Special Master had denied the fees, finding that Petitioner lacked a reasonable basis for pursuing the claim.

The Special Master noted that counsel for the Petitioner had not sought more complete medical records before filing, that counsel's claim of consulting records before filing was questionable as records were submitted late, and that the statute of limitations had not been imminent. The Special Master also found that an allergist's opinion that M.M.'s urticaria was "idiopathic" (of unknown origin) did not establish a reasonable basis for the claim.

The Special Master concluded the petition was supported by Petitioner's representations, which ran contrary to her medical records. Petitioner argued that counsel had reviewed some records, her affidavit supported her claims, and that timing of onset is not solely determined by medical records.

Respondent countered that medical records indicated urticaria developed at least fourteen months after vaccination, suggesting further investigation was needed before filing. Judge Wheeler affirmed the Special Master's denial of fees, finding that the Special Master acted within her discretion and that the decision was not arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law.

The Court noted that the Special Master clearly explained her view that Petitioner's counsel did not sufficiently investigate the records before filing, resulting in a vaccine claim without a reasonable basis. The decision was reissued on December 13, 2016, after being initially filed under seal.