Michael Rishwain v. HHS - Influenza, brachial neuritis (2016)

Filed 2015-07-06Decided 2016-08-30Vaccine Influenza
compensated$25,000

Case summary [AI summaries can sometimes make mistakes]

Michael Rishwain filed a petition for vaccine compensation on July 6, 2015, alleging that an influenza vaccine he received on October 22, 2013, caused him to suffer brachial neuritis and its residual effects for more than six months. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, denied that the flu vaccine caused Mr.

Rishwain's condition or any other injury. Despite these differing positions, the parties reached a joint stipulation to settle the case.

The Special Master, Christian J. Moran, found the stipulation reasonable and adopted it as the decision of the Court.

Mr. Rishwain was awarded a lump sum payment of $25,000.00, payable by check to him, as compensation for all damages.

This award represents a compromise of the parties' respective positions on liability and damages. The decision was entered on August 30, 2016.

Petitioner was represented by Jeffrey S. Pop, and respondent was represented by Adriana Ruth Teitel.

The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, diagnostic tests, treatments, or the medical experts consulted by either party. It also does not detail the specific mechanism by which the vaccine allegedly caused the brachial neuritis.

Theory of causation

Petitioner Michael Rishwain alleged that an influenza vaccine received on October 22, 2013, caused brachial neuritis and residual effects lasting over six months. The vaccine is listed on the Vaccine Injury Table. Respondent denied causation. The parties reached a stipulation to settle the case, agreeing to an award of $25,000.00 as compensation for all damages under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). Special Master Christian J. Moran adopted the stipulation on August 30, 2016. Petitioner was represented by Jeffrey S. Pop, and respondent by Adriana Ruth Teitel. The public decision does not detail the specific medical mechanism, expert opinions, or evidence presented regarding causation, relying instead on a stipulation to resolve the claim.

Source PDFs 2 total · 1 downloaded