VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_17-vv-00214
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_17-vv-00214
Petitioner: Chirag Palsana
Filed: 2017-02-14
Decided: 2020-11-10
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2015-10-12
Condition: transverse myelitis
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 814406

AI-assisted case summary:
Chirag Palsana filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program on February 14, 2017, alleging he suffered transverse myelitis as a result of receiving an influenza vaccine on October 12, 2015. He further alleged residual effects lasting more than six months. The respondent denied that the flu vaccine caused his transverse myelitis or any other injury. Nevertheless, on October 16, 2020, the parties filed a joint stipulation for damages. Special Master Daniel T. Horner found the stipulation reasonable and adopted it as the decision of the Court. The award includes a lump sum of $814,406.20, representing compensation for first-year life care expenses ($28,506.07), lost earnings ($608,023.31), pain and suffering ($175,000.00), and past unreimbursable expenses ($2,876.82). An additional amount was awarded to purchase an annuity contract. The decision directs the clerk of the court to enter judgment in accordance with the stipulation. The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, diagnostic tests, treatments, or expert witnesses. Petitioner counsel was Diana Lynn Stadelnikas of Maglio Christopher & Toale, PA, and respondent counsel was Lisa Ann Watts of the U.S. Department of Justice.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Chirag Palsana alleged that he suffered transverse myelitis (TM) as a result of receiving an influenza vaccine on October 12, 2015, and experienced residual effects for more than six months. The respondent denied that the vaccine caused the TM or any other injury. The parties filed a joint stipulation for damages, and Special Master Daniel T. Horner adopted the stipulation as the decision of the Court. The award included a lump sum of $814,406.20 for first-year life care expenses, lost earnings, pain and suffering, and past unreimbursable expenses, plus an amount to purchase an annuity. The public decision does not specify the theory of causation, the mechanism of injury, or name any experts. The decision was issued on November 10, 2020, based on a stipulation filed October 16, 2020. Petitioner counsel was Diana Lynn Stadelnikas, and respondent counsel was Lisa Ann Watts.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_17-vv-00214-0
Date issued/filed: 2020-11-10
Pages: 10
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 10/16/2020) regarding 53 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer. Signed by Special Master Daniel T. Horner. (et) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:17-vv-00214-UNJ Document 60 Filed 11/10/20 Page 1 of 10
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 17-214V
Filed: October 16, 2020
UNPUBLISHED
CHIRAG PALSANA,
Petitioner,
Joint Stipulation on Damages;
v.
Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; Transverse
Myelitis
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES,
Respondent.
Diana Lynn Stadelnikas, Maglio Christopher & Toale, PA, Sarasota, FL, for petitioner.
Lisa Ann Watts, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1
On February 14, 2017, 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 transverse myelitis (“TM”) as a result
of his receipt of an influenza (“flu”) vaccination on October 12, 2015. Petition at 1-3;
Stipulation, filed October 16, 2020, at ¶¶ 1-4. Petitioner further alleges that he
experienced residual effects for more than six months. Petition at 3; Stipulation at ¶ 4.
“Respondent denies that the flu vaccine caused petitioner’s TM, or any other injury; and
further denies that petitioner’s current disabilities are sequelae of a vaccine-related
injury.” Stipulation at ¶ 6.
Nevertheless, on October 16, 2020, the parties filed the attached joint stipulation,
stating that a decision should be entered awarding compensation. I find the stipulation
reasonable and adopt it as the decision of the Court in awarding damages, on the terms
set forth therein.
1 Because this decision contains a reasoned explanation for the special master’s action in this case, it will
be posted on the United States Court of Federal Claims’ website in accordance with the E-Government
Act of 2002. See 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of Electronic
Government Services). This means the decision will be available to anyone with access to the
Internet. 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 the special master, upon review, agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, it will be
redacted 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 1:17-vv-00214-UNJ Document 60 Filed 11/10/20 Page 2 of 10
Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Stipulation, I award the following
compensation:
a. A lump sum of $814, 406.20 in the form of a check payable to petitioner.
Stipulation at ¶ 8. This amount represents compensation for first-year life
care expenses ($28,506.07), lost earnings ($608,023.31), pain and suffering
($175,000.00), and past unreimbursable expenses ($2,876.82); and
b. An amount sufficient to purchase the annuity contract described in
paragraph 10 of the attached stipulation, paid to the life insurance
company from which the annuity will be purchased. Stipulation at ¶ 8.
This award represents compensation for all items of damages that would be available
under § 15(a). Id.
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/Daniel T. Horner
Daniel T. Horner
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 1:17-vv-00214-UNJ Document 60 Filed 11/10/20 Page 3 of 10

Case 1:17-vv-00214-UNJ Document 60 Filed 11/10/20 Page 4 of 10

Case 1:17-vv-00214-UNJ Document 60 Filed 11/10/20 Page 5 of 10

Case 1:17-vv-00214-UNJ Document 60 Filed 11/10/20 Page 6 of 10

Case 1:17-vv-00214-UNJ Document 60 Filed 11/10/20 Page 7 of 10

Case 1:17-vv-00214-UNJ Document 60 Filed 11/10/20 Page 8 of 10

Case 1:17-vv-00214-UNJ Document 60 Filed 11/10/20 Page 9 of 10

Case 1:17-vv-00214-UNJ Document 60 Filed 11/10/20 Page 10 of 10