Jennifer Ricci v. HHS - Influenza, left shoulder injury (2016)

Filed 2015-09-02Decided 2016-05-31Vaccine Influenza
compensated$91,680

Case summary [AI summaries can sometimes make mistakes]

Jennifer Ricci filed a petition on September 2, 2015, seeking compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. She alleged that an influenza vaccination received on October 14, 2014, caused a left shoulder injury.

The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, filed a report conceding causation-in-fact for the petitioner's shoulder injury related to vaccine administration, also known as SIRVA.

Following this concession, the parties submitted a proffer on the award of compensation. The respondent proposed an award of $91,680.17, representing all elements of compensation available under the Vaccine Act, and the petitioner agreed with this amount.

Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey issued a decision on May 31, 2016, awarding Jennifer Ricci a lump sum payment of $91,680.17. The decision noted that attorneys' fees and costs were to be discussed separately.

The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, medical tests performed, or treatments received. Maximillian Muller of Muller Brazil, LLP, represented the petitioner, and Robert Coleman of the U.S.

Department of Justice represented the respondent.

Theory of causation

Petitioner Jennifer Ricci alleged a left shoulder injury caused in fact by an influenza vaccine administered on October 14, 2014. The respondent conceded causation-in-fact for Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA). The parties agreed to an award of $91,680.17, representing all elements of compensation under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). This was presented in a Proffer on Award of Compensation filed April 12, 2016, and adopted by Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey in a decision dated May 31, 2016. Petitioner was represented by Maximillian Muller, and respondent by Robert P. Coleman III. The specific mechanism of injury, medical experts, and detailed clinical findings were not described in the public decision, which was based on a concession and proffer.

Source PDFs 2 total · 1 downloaded