VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-01404
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-01404
Petitioner: Jeffrey Treadway
Filed: 2017-02-14
Decided: 2017-03-17
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2014-10-10
Condition: Bell's palsy
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 60000

AI-assisted case summary:
Jeffrey Treadway filed a petition on February 14, 2017, seeking compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. He alleged that he developed Bell's palsy as a result of receiving an influenza vaccine on October 10, 2014, and that he experienced residual effects from this injury for more than six months. The respondent denied that the flu vaccination caused Mr. Treadway's Bell's palsy or any other injury. However, both parties agreed to settle the case through a stipulation filed on February 14, 2017. The stipulation stated that the issues could be resolved and that a decision should be entered awarding compensation to Mr. Treadway. Special Master Brian H. Corcoran reviewed the file and found the stipulation to be reasonable, adopting it as the decision. The stipulation awarded Mr. Treadway a lump sum of $60,000.00, payable by check, as compensation for all damages available under the Act. The court directed that judgment be entered accordingly. Petitioner was represented by William E. Cochran, Jr. of Black McLaren, et al., PC, and respondent was represented by Alexis Babcock of the U.S. Department of Justice.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Jeffrey Treadway alleged that his Bell's palsy was caused by an influenza vaccine received on October 10, 2014, and that he experienced residual effects for more than six months. Respondent denied causation. The parties reached a settlement via stipulation, agreeing that the issues could be resolved and compensation awarded. Special Master Brian H. Corcoran adopted the stipulation as his decision. The stipulation awarded a lump sum of $60,000.00 to Petitioner for all damages. The public decision does not describe the specific medical mechanism, expert testimony, or clinical details of the alleged injury or its onset. Petitioner was represented by William E. Cochran, Jr., and respondent by Alexis Babcock.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_15-vv-01404-0
Date issued/filed: 2017-03-17
Pages: 7
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 02/14/2017) regarding 26 DECISION Stipulation: Signed by Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (sb) Copy to parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:15-vv-01404-UNJ Document 30 Filed 03/17/17 Page 1 of 7
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 15-1404V
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
JEFFREY TREADWAY, * Special Master Corcoran
*
*
Petitioner, * Filed: February 14, 2017
*
v. *
* Decision by Stipulation; Damages;
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Influenza (“Flu”) Vaccine; Bell’s palsy.
AND HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
William E. Cochran, Jr., Black McLaren, et al., PC, Memphis, TN, for Petitioner.
Alexis Babcock, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1
On November 19, 2015, Jeffrey Treadway filed a petition seeking compensation under the
National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (“Vaccine Program”).2 Petitioner alleges that he
suffers from Bell’s palsy as a result of his October 10, 2014, receipt of the influenza (“flu”)
vaccine. Moreover, Petitioner alleges that he experienced residual effects of this injury for more
than six months.
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 1:15-vv-01404-UNJ Document 30 Filed 03/17/17 Page 2 of 7
Respondent denies that Petitioner’s flu vaccination caused his alleged Bell’s palsy, or any
other injury or condition. Nonetheless both parties, while maintaining their above-stated positions,
agreed in a stipulation (filed on February 14, 2017) that the issues before them could be settled,
and that a decision should be entered awarding Petitioner compensation.
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 $60,000.00 in the form of a check payable to Petitioner.
Stipulation ¶ 8. This amount 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 1:15-vv-01404-UNJ Document 30 Filed 03/17/17 Page 3 of 7

Case 1:15-vv-01404-UNJ Document 30 Filed 03/17/17 Page 4 of 7

Case 1:15-vv-01404-UNJ Document 30 Filed 03/17/17 Page 5 of 7

Case 1:15-vv-01404-UNJ Document 30 Filed 03/17/17 Page 6 of 7

Case 1:15-vv-01404-UNJ Document 30 Filed 03/17/17 Page 7 of 7