VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_16-vv-01707
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_16-vv-01707
Petitioner: Lee R. Campbell, M.D.
Filed: 2016-12-29
Decided: 2018-09-12
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2014-11-03
Condition: Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS)
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 200000

AI-assisted case summary:
On December 29, 2016, Dr. Lee R. Campbell filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. Dr. Campbell alleged that he suffered from Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) as a result of an influenza vaccination administered on November 3, 2014. He stated that the vaccine was administered in the United States, that he experienced residual effects for more than six months, and that no prior civil action had been filed for damages. The respondent denied that the flu immunization caused his alleged GBS or any other injury. Nevertheless, on May 31, 2018, the parties filed a joint stipulation agreeing that compensation should be awarded. Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey found the stipulation reasonable and adopted it as the Court's decision. Dr. Campbell was awarded a lump sum of $200,000.00 as compensation for all items of damages. The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, diagnostic tests, treatments, or expert witnesses. Petitioner counsel was Dustin Francis Fregiato of Ladendorf Law, and respondent counsel was Camille Michelle Collett of the U.S. Department of Justice.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Lee R. Campbell, M.D. alleged that an influenza vaccine administered on November 3, 2014, caused Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS). The respondent denied causation. The parties filed a joint stipulation on May 31, 2018, agreeing to an award of compensation. Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey adopted the stipulation as the Court's decision. Dr. Campbell was awarded a lump sum of $200,000.00. The public decision does not detail the specific theory of causation, medical experts, or the mechanism of injury. Petitioner was represented by Dustin Francis Fregiato, and respondent was represented by Camille Michelle Collett.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_16-vv-01707-0
Date issued/filed: 2018-09-12
Pages: 7
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 06/01/2018) regarding 27 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer ( Signed by Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey. )(mpj) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:16-vv-01707-UNJ Document 31 Filed 09/12/18 Page 1 of 7
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 16-1707V
Filed: June 1, 2018
UNPUBLISHED
LEE R. CAMPBELL, M.D.,
Special Processing Unit (SPU); Joint
Stipulation on Damages; Influenza
Petitioner,
(Flu) Vaccine; Guillain-Barre
v.
Syndrome (GBS)
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES,
Respondent.
Dustin Francis Fregiato, Ladendorf Law, Indianapolis, IN, for petitioner.
Camille Michelle Collett, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1
Dorsey, Chief Special Master:
On December 29, 2016, petitioner filed a petition for compensation under the
National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.,2 (the
“Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that he suffered from Guillain-Barre Syndrome
(“GBS”) as a result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccination administered on November 3,
2014. Petition at 1-2; Stipulation, filed May 31, 2018, at ¶¶ 1, 4. Petitioner further
alleges the vaccine was administered within the United States, that he experienced the
residual effects of this condition for more than six months, and that there has been no
prior award or settlement of a civil action for damages as a result of his condition.
Petition at 1-2; Stipulation at ¶¶ 3-5. “Respondent denies that the influenza
immunizations is the cause of petitioner’s alleged GBS or any other injury or condition.”
Stipulation at ¶ 6.
1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the
undersigned intends to 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 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of
Electronic Government Services). In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), petitioner has 14 days to
identify and move to redact medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute an
unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits
within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from public access.
2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for
ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. §
300aa (2012).

Case 1:16-vv-01707-UNJ Document 31 Filed 09/12/18 Page 2 of 7
Nevertheless, on May 31, 2018, the parties filed the attached joint stipulation,
stating that a decision should be entered awarding compensation. The undersigned
finds the stipulation reasonable and adopts it as the decision of the Court in awarding
damages, on the terms set forth therein.
Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Stipulation, the undersigned
awards the following compensation:
A lump sum of $200,000.00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner.
Stipulation at ¶ 8. This amount represents compensation for all items of
damages that would be available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). Id.
The undersigned approves the requested amount for petitioner’s compensation.
In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the clerk of
the court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this decision.3
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Nora Beth Dorsey
Nora Beth Dorsey
Chief Special Master
3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice
renouncing the right to seek review.
2

Case 1:16-vv-01707-UNJ Document 31 Filed 09/12/18 Page 3 of 7

Case 1:16-vv-01707-UNJ Document 31 Filed 09/12/18 Page 4 of 7

Case 1:16-vv-01707-UNJ Document 31 Filed 09/12/18 Page 5 of 7

Case 1:16-vv-01707-UNJ Document 31 Filed 09/12/18 Page 6 of 7

Case 1:16-vv-01707-UNJ Document 31 Filed 09/12/18 Page 7 of 7