Tonya Hood v. HHS - Influenza, multifocal acquired demyelinating sensory and motor neuropathy (2018)

Tonya Hood filed a petition on October 31, 2017, alleging that she developed multifocal acquired demyelinating sensory and motor neuropathy as a result of, or significantly aggravated by, an influenza vaccination received on November 7, 2014. The petition was initially processed, and medical records were filed.

The case was reassigned to Special Master Katherine E. Oler on January 11, 2018.

On January 24, 2018, Mrs. Hood's death certificate was filed, and her counsel, Mark Theodore Sadaka of Mark T.

Sadaka, LLC, indicated he was working with Mrs. Hood's surviving husband, James Hood.

On February 26, 2018, counsel reported that Mr. Hood was considering whether to continue the case.

On March 30, 2018, counsel notified the court that Mr. Hood had decided to withdraw the case.

On April 20, 2018, counsel filed a motion for dismissal, stating Mr. Hood's decision not to continue.

Special Master Oler ordered counsel to file documentation confirming Mr. Hood's appointment as Administrator of Mrs.

Hood's Estate. Instead, counsel requested a status conference and informed the court that Mr.

Hood was unwilling to be appointed administrator. A status conference was held on June 21, 2018, with Mr.

Sadaka appearing for the petitioner and Robert Paul Coleman, III of the U.S. Department of Justice appearing for the respondent.

During the conference, the parties discussed dismissal. Special Master Oler informed the parties that under the circumstances, Rule 25 of the Rules of the Court of Federal Claims (RCFC) required dismissal.

The parties had no objection. Mr.

Sadaka filed a motion for attorney's fees and costs on June 21, 2018. The public decision does not describe the specific symptoms, medical tests, or treatments related to Mrs.

Hood's alleged condition. The decision states that the Vaccine Rules do not address the death of a petitioner, so the RCFC were consulted.

RCFC Rule 25(a)(1) states that if a party dies and the claim is not extinguished, the court may order substitution of a proper party, but if a motion for substitution is not made within 90 days after service of a statement noting the death, the action must be dismissed. Mrs.

Hood's death certificate was filed on January 24, 2018, triggering the 90-day period, which expired on April 24, 2018. No motion for substitution was filed.

Therefore, Special Master Oler dismissed the case pursuant to Rule 25, due to the lack of a proper plaintiff to maintain the action. This decision was in accordance with Mr.

Hood's wishes. The Clerk was ordered to enter judgment accordingly.