C.N. v. HHS - Tdap, stillborn (2018)
Case summary [AI summaries can sometimes make mistakes]
On December 22, 2017, Sarah Neal and Richard C. Neal, as parents of the deceased infant C.N., filed a petition seeking compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.
They alleged that a Tdap vaccine administered to Sarah Neal on December 22, 2015, while C.N. was in utero, caused C.N. to be delivered stillborn on December 24, 2015. Sarah Neal also filed a separate petition on her own behalf concerning the same event.
The respondent moved to dismiss the petition on behalf of C.N., arguing that a recent amendment to the Vaccine Act, which allows claims for in utero vaccine injuries, requires the child to have been born alive to be considered a "child" under the Act, citing the definition in 1 U.S.C. § 8. The petitioners argued that this interpretation was too narrow and raised constitutional challenges, including violations of due process, equal protection, the First Amendment, and age discrimination.
Special Master Brian H. Corcoran issued a decision on July 24, 2018, dismissing the petition.
He held that because C.N. was not born alive, the petition did not state a cognizable claim under the relevant amendment to the Vaccine Act. Special Master Corcoran rejected the petitioners' constitutional and policy arguments, noting that claims under the Vaccine Act are reviewed under a rational basis standard and that Sarah Neal's separate individual claim remained available.
No compensation was awarded on behalf of C.N. The decision was published on September 19, 2018.
Phyllis Widman of Widman Law Firm LLC represented the petitioners, and Traci Patton of the U.S. Department of Justice represented the respondent.
Theory of causation
Petitioners alleged that a Tdap vaccine administered to Sarah Neal on December 22, 2015, while she was pregnant, caused her infant, C.N., to be delivered stillborn on December 24, 2015. The case was dismissed because Special Master Brian H. Corcoran determined that the 21st Century Cures Act amendment to the Vaccine Act, which allows claims for in utero vaccine injuries, requires the claimant child to be "born alive" as defined in 1 U.S.C. § 8. There was no dispute that C.N. was not born alive. Petitioners' arguments that this interpretation was too narrow, violated constitutional rights (due process, equal protection, First Amendment, age discrimination), and conflicted with state tort law were rejected. Special Master Corcoran found that Vaccine Act claims are subject to rational basis review and that federal law definitions preempt state law. The petition was dismissed on July 24, 2018, with no award. Petitioners were represented by Phyllis Widman, and the respondent was represented by Traci Patton.
Source PDFs
USCOURTS-cofc-1_17-vv-02020