VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_16-vv-01329
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_16-vv-01329
Petitioner: L.L.
Filed: 2016-10-12
Decided: 2018-03-08
Vaccine: DTaP, MMR, polio, and varicella
Vaccination date: 2014-03-08
Condition: reactive inflammatory arthritis
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 10327

AI-assisted case summary:
On October 12, 2016, Lisa Lebron, on behalf of her minor child L.L., filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. The petition alleged that L.L. suffered from reactive inflammatory arthritis as a result of DTaP, MMR, polio, and varicella vaccines administered on March 8, 2014. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, denied that the vaccines caused L.L.'s condition or any other injury. The parties subsequently filed a joint stipulation to settle the issues and award compensation. Special Master Thomas L. Gowen reviewed the stipulation. The stipulation awarded a lump sum of $10,000.00, payable to petitioner as the legal representative of L.L., and a lump sum of $327.52, payable to petitioner. Additionally, an amount sufficient to purchase an annuity contract was awarded. Special Master Gowen found the stipulation to be reasonable and adopted it as the decision of the Court, ordering judgment to be entered in accordance with its terms. The total award amounted to $10,327.52 plus the annuity. Petitioner's counsel was Diana L. Stadelnikas of Maglio Christopher and Toale, PA. Respondent's counsel was Lara A. Englund of the United States Department of Justice. The public decision does not describe the onset of symptoms, specific clinical details, diagnostic tests, treatments, or the specific mechanism of causation.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner alleged that L.L. suffered from reactive inflammatory arthritis as a result of DTaP, MMR, polio, and varicella vaccines administered on March 8, 2014. Respondent denied causation. The parties reached a joint stipulation for settlement. The stipulation awarded $10,000.00 to petitioner as legal representative of L.L., $327.52 to petitioner, and an amount for an annuity. Special Master Gowen adopted the stipulation as the decision of the Court. The public decision does not detail the specific theory of causation, medical experts, or the mechanism of injury.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_16-vv-01329-0
Date issued/filed: 2018-03-08
Pages: 8
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 02/09/2018) regarding 35 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer ( Signed by Special Master Thomas L. Gowen.)(mpj) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:16-vv-01329-UNJ Document 42 Filed 03/08/18 Page 1 of 8
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
Filed: February 9, 2018
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
LISA LEBRON on behalf of L.L., a minor * UNPUBLISHED
child, *
Petitioner, * No. 16-1329V
*
v. * Special Master Gowen
*
SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Joint Stipulation; DTaP;
AND HUMAN SERVICES, * MMR; Polio; Varicella;
* Reactive Inflammatory
Respondent. * Arthritis.
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
Diana L. Stadelnikas, Maglio Christopher and Toale, PA (FL), Sarasota, FL, for petitioner.
Lara A. Englund, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1
On October 12, 2016, Lisa Lebron (“petitioner”), on behalf of L.L., a minor child, filed a
petition for compensation pursuant to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.2
Petitioner alleges that L.L. suffered from reactive inflammatory arthritis as a result of DTaP,
MMR, polio, and varicella vaccines administered on March 8, 2014. Petition at ¶¶ 3, 12;
Stipulation at ¶¶ 1,4.
On February 8, 2018, the parties filed a joint stipulation (“Stipulation”) in which they
state that a decision should be entered awarding compensation to petitioner. ECF No. 34.
Respondent denies that the vaccines L.L. received caused him to suffer from reactive
inflammatory arthritis, his current condition, or any other injury. Id. at ¶ 6.
1
Pursuant to the E-Government Act of 2002, see 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012), because this decision contains a
reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I intend to post it on the website of the United States Court of
Federal Claims. The court’s website is at http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/aggregator/sources/7. Before the decision
is posted on the court’s website, each party has 14 days to file a motion requesting 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). “An objecting party must provide the court with a proposed
redacted version of the decision.” Id. If neither party files a motion for redaction within 14 days, the decision
will be posted on the court’s website without any changes. Id.
2
The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program is set forth in Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine
Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755, codified as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to -34 (2012)
(Vaccine Act or the Act). All citations in this decision to individual sections of the Vaccine Act are to 42 U.S.C.A. §
300aa.

Case 1:16-vv-01329-UNJ Document 42 Filed 03/08/18 Page 2 of 8
Maintaining their above-stated positions, the parties nevertheless now agree that the
issues between them shall be settled and that a decision should be entered awarding
compensation to petitioner according to the terms of the joint stipulation attached hereto as
Appendix A.
The joint stipulation awards:3
1) A lump sum of $10,000.00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner, as legal
representative of L.L.;
2) A lump sum of $327.52, in the form of a check payable to petitioner; and
3) An amount sufficient to purchase the annuity contract described in ¶10 of the
stipulation, paid to the life insurance company from which the annuity will be
purchased.
I find the stipulation reasonable and I adopt it as the decision of the Court in
awarding damages, on the terms set forth therein.
Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court SHALL ENTER JUDGMENT in accordance with
the terms of the parties’ stipulation.4
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Thomas L. Gowen
Thomas L. Gowen
Special Master
3 These amounts represent compensation for all damages that would be available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a).
4 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment is expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice renouncing the
right to seek review.
2

Case 1:16-vv-01329-UNJ Document 42 Filed 03/08/18 Page 3 of 8

Case 1:16-vv-01329-UNJ Document 42 Filed 03/08/18 Page 4 of 8

Case 1:16-vv-01329-UNJ Document 42 Filed 03/08/18 Page 5 of 8

Case 1:16-vv-01329-UNJ Document 42 Filed 03/08/18 Page 6 of 8

Case 1:16-vv-01329-UNJ Document 42 Filed 03/08/18 Page 7 of 8

Case 1:16-vv-01329-UNJ Document 42 Filed 03/08/18 Page 8 of 8