Lisa Hale v. HHS - Tdap, Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA) (2015)
Case summary [AI summaries can sometimes make mistakes]
Lisa Hale filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program on June 1, 2015, alleging she suffered left shoulder injuries following a Tdap vaccination administered on February 27, 2013. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, filed a Rule 4(c) report on October 13, 2015, conceding that Ms.
Hale is entitled to compensation. The respondent opined that Ms.
Hale experienced Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA) within 48 hours of the Tdap vaccination, with no other identified causes. The respondent further agreed that the injury persisted for at least six months and that all other legal prerequisites under the Act were satisfied.
Based on the respondent's concession and the evidence, Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey found that Ms. Hale is entitled to compensation.
The case was proceeding to determine damages. Petitioner was represented by Mark Theodore Sadaka of Mark T.
Sadaka, LLC, and respondent was represented by Lisa Ann Watts of the U.S. Department of Justice.
The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, medical tests performed, treatments received, or the specific mechanism of injury beyond the general classification of SIRVA.
Theory of causation
Petitioner Lisa Hale alleged injury following a Tdap vaccination on February 27, 2013. The alleged injury was Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA). The respondent conceded entitlement, opining that SIRVA occurred within 48 hours of vaccination, with no other identified causes, persisted for at least six months, and satisfied all other legal prerequisites. The respondent agreed that the Tdap vaccination more likely than not caused the SIRVA. The Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey issued a ruling on entitlement based on the respondent's concession. The case was proceeding to determine damages. Petitioner counsel was Mark Theodore Sadaka, and respondent counsel was Lisa Ann Watts. The theory of causation relied on the respondent's concession and the general framework of the Vaccine Act, specifically referencing SIRVA as a condition that can be caused by vaccination. The public text does not name specific medical experts or detail the mechanism of injury beyond the classification of SIRVA.
Source PDFs
USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-00562