Nancy Calhoun v. HHS - Influenza, Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) (2018)

On November 4, 2016, Tommy Calhoun filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program on behalf of his mother, Nancy Calhoun, alleging that she suffered Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) as a result of an influenza vaccination received on September 18, 2014. Initially, Tommy Calhoun filed the petition due to his mother having granted him limited power of attorney.

On May 11, 2018, the court granted a motion to amend the caption to reflect Nancy Calhoun as the sole petitioner, as her mental and physical capacity had improved. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, filed an amended Rule 4(c) Report and Proffer on Damages on August 21, 2018.

In this report, the respondent conceded entitlement to compensation, stating that Nancy Calhoun satisfied the criteria set forth in the revised Vaccine Injury Table and the Qualifications and Aids to Interpretation. The respondent noted that while the revised Table governed petitions filed on or after its effective date, the petitioner could re-file and be afforded a presumption of causation under the revised Table.

Therefore, the respondent agreed not to contest entitlement. On August 22, 2018, Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey issued a ruling on entitlement, finding petitioner entitled to compensation.

Subsequently, the parties engaged in proceedings for damages. On August 21, 2018, the respondent filed a proffer indicating an agreed-upon award of $146,667.00.

This amount was stipulated to include $135,000.00 for pain and suffering, $6,167.00 for past unreimbursable out-of-pocket expenses, and $5,500.00 for future unreimbursable out-of-pocket expenses. The respondent represented that the petitioner agreed with this proffered award.

On December 6, 2018, Chief Special Master Dorsey issued a decision awarding Nancy Calhoun a total of $146,667.00, payable by check to Nancy Calhoun, representing compensation for all damages available under the Vaccine Act. The decision noted that the case had been subject to prior rulings and judgments that were vacated and reissued due to errors in the sub-amounts listed in an earlier proffer.

The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, medical tests, treatments, or expert witnesses involved in this case. Petitioner was represented by Simina Vourlis of the Law Offices of Simina Vourlis, and respondent was represented by Adriana Ruth Teitel of the U.S.

Department of Justice.