VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_18-vv-00640
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_18-vv-00640
Petitioner: Adam Crispo
Filed: 2018-05-04
Decided: 2020-08-13
Vaccine: meningococcal
Vaccination date: 2017-01-20
Condition: shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA)
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 71888

AI-assisted case summary:
Adam Crispo filed a petition on May 4, 2018, seeking compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. He alleged a Table claim for a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) resulting from a meningococcal vaccine received on January 20, 2017. The petition also noted he received a yellow fever vaccine on the same day. A fact hearing was held on January 17, 2020, to address the onset of pain and the situs of vaccination. Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran made two factual findings: first, that Mr. Crispo established pain onset within 48 hours of vaccine administration, and second, that the vaccines were administered in his left arm. The public decision does not describe the specific symptoms, medical tests, or treatments Mr. Crispo experienced. The respondent initially noted that other records suggested the vaccines were administered in the right arm, but later conceded that Mr. Crispo suffered SIRVA as defined by the Vaccine Injury Table. The respondent's concession was based on the factual findings from the January 17th hearing. Following the concession, Chief Special Master Corcoran issued a ruling on April 30, 2020, granting entitlement to damages. The parties then proceeded to the damages phase. On June 24, 2020, the respondent proffered a damages award. On August 13, 2020, Chief Special Master Corcoran issued a decision approving a total award of $71,888.52. This amount was comprised of $70,000.00 for pain and suffering and $1,888.52 for past unreimbursed out-of-pocket medical expenses. The award was to be paid as a lump sum check payable to Mr. Crispo. Petitioner was represented by Bruce William Slane of the Law Office of Bruce W. Slane, P.C., and respondent was represented by James Vincent Lopez of the U.S. Department of Justice. The public decision does not name any medical experts.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Adam Crispo filed a petition on May 4, 2018, alleging a Table claim for Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA) from a meningococcal vaccine administered on January 20, 2017. A fact hearing established pain onset within 48 hours and that the vaccine was administered in the left arm. The respondent conceded that Petitioner suffered SIRVA as defined by the Vaccine Injury Table. Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran granted entitlement on April 30, 2020. A subsequent decision on August 13, 2020, awarded $71,888.52, consisting of $70,000.00 for pain and suffering and $1,888.52 for past unreimbursed out-of-pocket medical expenses. The public decision does not detail the specific mechanism of injury or name any medical experts. Petitioner was represented by Bruce William Slane, and Respondent by James Vincent Lopez.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_18-vv-00640-0
Date issued/filed: 2020-06-02
Pages: 3
Docket text: PUBLIC ORDER/RULING (Originally filed: 04/30/2020) regarding 44 Ruling on Entitlement Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (sw) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:18-vv-00640-UNJ Document 46 Filed 06/02/20 Page 1 of 3
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 18-640V
(not to be published)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Chief Special Master Corcoran
ADAM CRISPO, *
* Filed: April 30, 2020
Petitioner, *
*
v. *
*
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND *
HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Bruce William Slane, Law Office of Bruce W. Slane, P.C., NY, for Petitioner
James Vincent Lopez, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Respondent
RULING GRANTING ENTITLEMENT1
On May 4, 2018, Adam Crispo filed a petition seeking compensation under the National
Vaccine and Injury Compensation Program (the “Vaccine Program”).2 Petition at 1(ECF No. 1).
Petitioner alleges a Table claim—that he suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine
administration (“SIRVA”) attributable to a meningococcal vaccine he received on January 20,
2017. Although the medical records filed in this case establish that Petitioner received extensive
treatment for left arm and shoulder symptoms, other records seemed to establish that he had
1 This Ruling will be posted on the Court of Federal Claims’ website in accordance with the E-Government Act of
2002, 44 U.S.C. § 3501 (2012). This means that the Decision will be available to anyone with access to the
internet. As provided by 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(d)(4)(B), however, the parties may object to the Ruling’s inclusion of
certain kinds of confidential information. Specifically, under Vaccine Rule 18(b), each party has fourteen days within
which to request redaction “of any information furnished by that party: (1) that is a trade secret or commercial or
financial in substance and is privileged or confidential; or (2) that includes medical files or similar files, the disclosure
of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy.” Vaccine Rule 18(b). Otherwise, the whole
Ruling will be available to the public in its current form. Id.
2 Counsel filed a status report on November 7, 2019, informing me of Ms. Rowan’s passing in September 2019, and
also stating that her estate would be continuing to prosecute the claim. ECF No. 34. Earlier this month, counsel
indicated that an estate representative had finally been appointed, and the caption has been revised to reflect the new
petitioner. Order, dated April 16, 2020 (ECF No. 36).

Case 1:18-vv-00640-UNJ Document 46 Filed 06/02/20 Page 2 of 3
received vaccines (one meningococcal vaccine and one yellow fever vaccine, which cannot be the
basis for a Program claim) in his right arm and deltoid.
A one-day fact hearing was held on January 17, 2020, to address both onset and situs of
vaccination issues. At the conclusion of the hearing, I made two factual findings necessary, but
not sufficient, to find in Petitioner’s favor.3 See Order at 1–2, filed Jan. 21, 2020 (ECF No. 36).
First, I found that Petitioner preponderantly established pain onset within 48 hours of vaccine
administration. Id. at 1. Second, I found that Petitioner preponderantly established that he received
the vaccines in his left arm. Id. at 2.
However, I noted that the hearing did not resolve all the issues regarding entitlement. Order
at 2. Petitioner still needed to establish either that the meningococcal vaccine alone caused his
injuries, or that it was the most likely “but for” cause of his injury, even if other factors (here,
receipt of the yellow fever vaccine) played a role. See id. (citing Shyface v. Sec’y of Health &
Human Servs., 165 F.3d 1344 (1999)). Proving either theory could require expert testimony,
another hearing, or possibly both. Id. Further, the facts of Petitioner’s case indicated that any
potential entitlement award would likely be modest. Id. Given all of the above, I encouraged the
parties to explore settling the case. Id.
On March 23, 2020, the parties submitted a joint status report indicating that Respondent
did not intend to defend this case on other grounds, due to the factual findings made at the January
17th hearing. Joint Status Rep. at 1 (ECF No. 42). Respondent requested thirty days to file an
amended Rule 4(c) report to set forth his revised position. Id. On April 23, 2020, Respondent
submitted an amended 4(c) Report, in which he conceded that “Petitioner suffered SIRVA as
defined by the Vaccine Injury Table.” Amended 4(c) Rep. at 5, filed on April 23, 2020 (ECF No.
43). Respondent maintained that Petitioner’s damages—if I award him entitlement—were limited
to his “SIRVA and related sequalae only.” Id. Respondent also requested more information from
Petitioner—e.g., more medical records, information on insurance policies, and care that Petitioner
received for his SIRVA injury—that would help resolve the amount of compensation in this case.
Id. at 6–7.
CONCLUSION
In light of Respondent’s Amended 4(c) Report and the concession it contains, as well as
my fact hearing findings, I hereby determine that Petitioner has established an entitlement to
damages under the Table’s SIRVA injury claim, and may therefore receive compensation under
the Act for damages related to his SIRVA and its sequalae.
3 To establish a Table SIRVA claim, a petitioner must show that onset of pain occurred within 48 hours, and that the
“[p]ain and reduced range of motion are limited to the shoulder in which the intramuscular vaccine was administered.”
42 C.F.R. § 100.3(a)(XV)(B), (c)(10)(iii).
2

Case 1:18-vv-00640-UNJ Document 46 Filed 06/02/20 Page 3 of 3
In order to guide the parties through the damages phase of the action, a separate damages
order will issue.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ Brian H. Corcoran
Brian H. Corcoran
Chief Special Master
3

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 2: USCOURTS-cofc-1_18-vv-00640-1
Date issued/filed: 2020-07-27
Pages: 3
Docket text: PUBLIC ORDER/RULING (Originally filed: 04/30/2020) regarding 44 Ruling on Entitlement Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (sw) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:18-vv-00640-UNJ Document 52 Filed 07/27/20 Page 1 of 3
CORRECTED
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 18-640V
(not to be published)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Chief Special Master Corcoran
ADAM CRISPO, *
* Filed: April 30, 2020
Petitioner, *
*
v. *
* Keywords: Ruling granting
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND * entitlement; SIRVA;
HUMAN SERVICES, * Meningococcal vaccine.
*
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Bruce William Slane, Law Office of Bruce W. Slane, P.C., NY, for Petitioner
James Vincent Lopez, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Respondent
RULING GRANTING ENTITLEMENT1
On May 4, 2018, Adam Crispo filed a petition seeking compensation under the National
Vaccine and Injury Compensation Program (the “Vaccine Program”).2 Petition at 1(ECF No. 1).
Petitioner alleges a Table claim—that he suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine
administration (“SIRVA”) attributable to a meningococcal vaccine he received on January 20,
2017. Although the medical records filed in this case establish that Petitioner received extensive
treatment for left arm and shoulder symptoms, other records seemed to establish that he had
1 This Ruling will be posted on the Court of Federal Claims’ website in accordance with the E-Government Act of
2002, 44 U.S.C. § 3501 (2012). This means that the Decision will be available to anyone with access to the
internet. As provided by 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(d)(4)(B), however, the parties may object to the Ruling’s inclusion of
certain kinds of confidential information. Specifically, under Vaccine Rule 18(b), each party has fourteen days within
which to request redaction “of any information furnished by that party: (1) that is a trade secret or commercial or
financial in substance and is privileged or confidential; or (2) that includes medical files or similar files, the disclosure
of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy.” Vaccine Rule 18(b). Otherwise, the whole
Ruling will be available to the public in its current form. Id.
2 Counsel filed a status report on November 7, 2019, informing me of Ms. Rowan’s passing in September 2019, and
also stating that her estate would be continuing to prosecute the claim. ECF No. 34. Earlier this month, counsel
indicated that an estate representative had finally been appointed, and the caption has been revised to reflect the new
petitioner. Order, dated April 16, 2020 (ECF No. 36).

Case 1:18-vv-00640-UNJ Document 52 Filed 07/27/20 Page 2 of 3
received vaccines (one meningococcal vaccine and one yellow fever vaccine, which cannot be the
basis for a Program claim) in his right arm and deltoid.
A one-day fact hearing was held on January 17, 2020, to address both onset and situs of
vaccination issues. At the conclusion of the hearing, I made two factual findings necessary, but
not sufficient, to find in Petitioner’s favor.3 See Order at 1–2, filed Jan. 21, 2020 (ECF No. 36).
First, I found that Petitioner preponderantly established pain onset within 48 hours of vaccine
administration. Id. at 1. Second, I found that Petitioner preponderantly established that he received
the vaccines in his left arm. Id. at 2.
However, I noted that the hearing did not resolve all the issues regarding entitlement. Order
at 2. Petitioner still needed to establish either that the meningococcal vaccine alone caused his
injuries, or that it was the most likely “but for” cause of his injury, even if other factors (here,
receipt of the yellow fever vaccine) played a role. See id. (citing Shyface v. Sec’y of Health &
Human Servs., 165 F.3d 1344 (1999)). Proving either theory could require expert testimony,
another hearing, or possibly both. Id. Further, the facts of Petitioner’s case indicated that any
potential entitlement award would likely be modest. Id. Given all of the above, I encouraged the
parties to explore settling the case. Id.
On March 23, 2020, the parties submitted a joint status report indicating that Respondent
did not intend to defend this case on other grounds, due to the factual findings made at the January
17th hearing. Joint Status Rep. at 1 (ECF No. 42). Respondent requested thirty days to file an
amended Rule 4(c) report to set forth his revised position. Id. On April 23, 2020, Respondent
submitted an amended 4(c) Report, in which he conceded that “Petitioner suffered SIRVA as
defined by the Vaccine Injury Table.” Amended 4(c) Rep. at 5, filed on April 23, 2020 (ECF No.
43). Respondent maintained that Petitioner’s damages—if I award him entitlement—were limited
to his “SIRVA and related sequalae only.” Id. Respondent also requested more information from
Petitioner—e.g., more medical records, information on insurance policies, and care that Petitioner
received for his SIRVA injury—that would help resolve the amount of compensation in this case.
Id. at 6–7.
CONCLUSION
In light of Respondent’s Amended 4(c) Report and the concession it contains, as well as
my fact hearing findings, I hereby determine that Petitioner has established an entitlement to
damages under the Table’s SIRVA injury claim, and may therefore receive compensation under
the Act for damages related to his SIRVA and its sequalae.
3 To establish a Table SIRVA claim, a petitioner must show that onset of pain occurred within 48 hours, and that the
“[p]ain and reduced range of motion are limited to the shoulder in which the intramuscular vaccine was administered.”
42 C.F.R. § 100.3(a)(XV)(B), (c)(10)(iii).
2

Case 1:18-vv-00640-UNJ Document 52 Filed 07/27/20 Page 3 of 3
In order to guide the parties through the damages phase of the action, a separate damages
order will issue.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ Brian H. Corcoran
Brian H. Corcoran
Chief Special Master
3

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 3: USCOURTS-cofc-1_18-vv-00640-2
Date issued/filed: 2020-08-13
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 06/26/2020) regarding 48 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (sw) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:18-vv-00640-UNJ Document 53 Filed 08/13/20 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 18-640V
(not to be published)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Chief Special Master Corcoran
ADAM CRISPO, *
* Filed: June 26, 2020
Petitioner, *
*
v. *
* Keywords: Proffer; Decision
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND * awarding damages.
HUMAN SERVICES, *
*
Respondent. *
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Bruce William Slane, Law Office of Bruce W. Slane, P.C., NY, for Petitioner
James Vincent Lopez, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Respondent
DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1
On May 4, 2018, Adam Crispo filed a petition seeking compensation under the National
Vaccine and Injury Compensation Program (the “Vaccine Program”).2 Petition at 1(ECF No. 1).
Petitioner alleges a Table claim—that he suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine
administration (“SIRVA”) attributable to a meningococcal vaccine he received on January 20,
2017. A one-day fact hearing was held on January 17, 2020, to address both onset and situs of
1 Although not formally designated for publication, this Decision will be posted on the United States Court of Federal
Claims website in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, 44 U.S.C. § 3501 (2012). This means the Decision
will be available to anyone with access to the internet. As provided by 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(d)(4)(B), however,
the parties may object to the published Decision’s inclusion of certain kinds of confidential information. Specifically,
under Vaccine Rule 18(b), each party has fourteen days within which to request redaction “of any information
furnished by that party: (1) that is a trade secret or commercial or financial in substance and is privileged or
confidential; or (2) that includes medical files or similar files, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly
unwarranted invasion of privacy.” Vaccine Rule 18(b). Otherwise, the whole Decision will be available to the public
in its current form. Id.
2 Counsel filed a status report on November 7, 2019, informing me of Ms. Rowan’s passing in September 2019, and
also stating that her estate would be continuing to prosecute the claim. ECF No. 34. Earlier this month, counsel
indicated that an estate representative had finally been appointed, and the caption has been revised to reflect the new
petitioner. Order, dated April 16, 2020 (ECF No. 36).

Case 1:18-vv-00640-UNJ Document 53 Filed 08/13/20 Page 2 of 2
vaccination issues. At the conclusion of the hearing, I made two factual findings necessary, but
not sufficient, to make an entitlement ruling in Petitioner’s favor.3 See Order at 1–2, filed Jan. 21,
2020 (ECF No. 36). Thereafter I encouraged the parties to settle the case.
The parties attempted to settle the case. Petitioner made a settlement demand on
Respondent. Status Rep., filed February 20, 2020 (ECF No. 41). Then, in a joint status report, the
parties informed the court that Respondent did not intend to defend the case on other grounds.
Joint Status Rep., filed March 23, 2020 (ECF No. 42). Respondent revised his Rule 4(c) Report to
reflect this. Amended Rule 4(c) Rep., filed April 23, 2020 (ECF No. 43). On April 30, 2020, in
light of Respondent’s Amended 4(c) Report, I issued a ruling finding that Petitioner had
established entitlement to damages under the Table’s SIRVA injury. Ruling on Entitlement, filed
April 30, 2020 (ECF No. 44). The same day, I issued an order to guide the parties through the
damages process. Damages Order, filed April 30, 2020 (ECF No. 45).
Now, Respondent had proffered the amount of damages to which he represents that
petitioner is entitled. Proffer, filed June 24, 2020 (ECF No. 47).
The Proffer proposes:
• That Petitioner should be awarded $71,888.52, comprised of $70,000.00 for pain and
suffering, and $1,888.52 for past unreimbursed out-of-pocket medical expenses;
• that the damages award should be made through a lump sum payment of $71,888.52 in
the form of a check payable to Petitioner; and
• that this amount represents compensation for all elements of compensation under
Vaccine Act Section 15(a) to which Petitioner is entitled.
I approve a Vaccine Program award in the requested amount set forth above to be made to
Petitioner. In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the clerk of
the Court is directed to enter judgment herewith.4
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ Brian H. Corcoran
Brian H. Corcoran
Chief Special Master
3 To establish a Table SIRVA claim, a petitioner must show that onset of pain occurred within 48 hours, and that the
“[p]ain and reduced range of motion are limited to the shoulder in which the intramuscular vaccine was administered.”
42 C.F.R. § 100.3(a)(XV)(B), (c)(10)(iii).
4 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by each filing (either jointly or separately)
a notice renouncing their right to seek review.
2