VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_18-vv-00650
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_18-vv-00650
Petitioner: Mary Stewart
Filed: 2018-05-08
Decided: 2019-08-21
Vaccine: influenza
Vaccination date: 2016-09-27
Condition: debilitating pain and weakness, restricted range of motion, and adhesive capsulitis of her left shoulder and arm
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 112654

AI-assisted case summary:
Mary Stewart filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program on May 8, 2018. She alleged that an influenza vaccination she received on September 27, 2016, caused debilitating pain and weakness, restricted range of motion, and adhesive capsulitis of her left shoulder and arm. The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, filed a Rule 4(c) report on April 25, 2019, conceding that Ms. Stewart's claim met the Table criteria for Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA). Based on the respondent's concession and the evidence of record, Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey issued a ruling on entitlement on April 25, 2019, finding Ms. Stewart entitled to compensation. Subsequently, on April 25, 2019, the respondent filed a combined Rule 4 report and proffer on the award of compensation. In this document, the respondent indicated that Ms. Stewart should be awarded $112,654.00, comprising $110,000.00 for pain and suffering and $2,654.00 for past unreimbursable expenses. The respondent represented that Ms. Stewart agreed with this proffered award. Chief Special Master Dorsey issued a decision on August 21, 2019, awarding Ms. Stewart a lump sum payment of $112,654.00, representing compensation for all damages available under § 15(a). The decision was published on the court's website in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002. Glen Howard Stertevant, Jr. represented the petitioner, and Ryan Daniel Pyles represented the respondent. The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, medical tests performed, treatments received, or the medical expert witnesses involved in this case.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner Mary Stewart alleged that an influenza vaccination received on September 27, 2016, caused debilitating pain and weakness, restricted range of motion, and adhesive capsulitis of her left shoulder and arm, a condition categorized as Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA). The respondent conceded that the claim met the Table criteria for SIRVA. The Special Master found entitlement based on this concession. A subsequent stipulation awarded $112,654.00, consisting of $110,000.00 for pain and suffering and $2,654.00 for past unreimbursable expenses. The public decision does not detail the specific mechanism of injury, expert testimony, or other medical evidence supporting the causation theory beyond the respondent's concession to the Table criteria for SIRVA. The decision was issued by Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey on April 25, 2019 (entitlement) and August 21, 2019 (damages). Petitioner was represented by Glen Howard Stertevant, Jr., and respondent by Ryan Daniel Pyles.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_18-vv-00650-0
Date issued/filed: 2019-08-07
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC ORDER/RULING (Originally filed: 04/25/2019) regarding 25 Ruling on Entitlement ( Signed by Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey. )(mpj) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:18-vv-00650-UNJ Document 35 Filed 08/07/19 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 18-650V
Filed: April 25, 2019
UNPUBLISHED
MARY STEWART,
Petitioner, Special Processing Unit (SPU);
v. Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;
Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine;
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine
HUMAN SERVICES, Administration (SIRVA)
Respondent.
Glen Howard Stertevant, Jr., Rawls Law Group, Richmond, VA, for petitioner.
Ryan Daniel Pyles, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1
Dorsey, Chief Special Master:
On May 8, 2018, 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 she suffered “debilitating pain and weakness, restricted
range of motion, and adhesive capsulitis of her left shoulder and arm, which were
caused-in-fact by the [influenza] vaccination” she received on September 27, 2016.
Petition at 1. Petitioner further alleges that she received the vaccination alleged in the
United States, suffered the residual effects of her injury for more than six months, and
that neither she nor any other party has filed a civil action or received compensation for
her injury, alleged as vaccine caused. Id. at ¶¶ 2, 20-22. The case was assigned to the
Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.
1 The undersigned intends to post this ruling on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website. This
means the ruling 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, upon review, the undersigned
agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from
public access. Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this
case, undersigned is required 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).
2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755.

Case 1:18-vv-00650-UNJ Document 35 Filed 08/07/19 Page 2 of 2
On April 25, 2019, respondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes
that petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report
and Proffer at 1. Specifically, respondent indicates that he has “concluded that
petitioner’s claim meets the Table criteria for SIRVA.” Id. at 3.
In view of respondent’s position and the evidence of record, the
undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Nora Beth Dorsey
Nora Beth Dorsey
Chief Special Master

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 2: USCOURTS-cofc-1_18-vv-00650-1
Date issued/filed: 2019-08-21
Pages: 2
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 04/25/2019) regarding 26 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer ( Signed by Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey. )(mpj) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:18-vv-00650-UNJ Document 36 Filed 08/21/19 Page 1 of 2
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 18-0650V
Filed: April 25, 2019
UNPUBLISHED
MARY STEWART,
Petitioner,
Special Processing Unit (SPU);
v.
Damages Decision Based on Proffer;
Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; Shoulder
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND
Injury Related to Vaccine
HUMAN SERVICES,
Administration (SIRVA)
Respondent.
Glen Howard Stertevant, Jr., Rawls Law Group, Richmond, VA, for petitioner.
Ryan Daniel Pyles, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1
Dorsey, Chief Special Master:
On May 8, 2018, 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 she suffered “debilitating pain and weakness, restricted
range of motion, and adhesive capsulitis of her left shoulder and arm, which were
caused-in-fact by the [influenza] vaccination” she received on September 27, 2016.
Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of
Special Masters.
On April 25, 2019, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding petitioner entitled to
compensation for her shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”). On
April 25, 2019, respondent filed a combined Rule 4 report and proffer on award of
1 The undersigned intends to post this decision on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website.
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, upon review, the
undersigned agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, the undersigned will redact such
material from public access. Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the
action in this case, undersigned is required 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).
2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755.

Case 1:18-vv-00650-UNJ Document 36 Filed 08/21/19 Page 2 of 2
compensation (“Rule 4 Report and Proffer”)3 indicating petitioner should be awarded
$112,654.00, representing compensation in the amount of $110,000.00 for pain and
suffering and $2,654.00 for past unreimbursable expenses. Rule 4 Report and Proffer
at 4. In the Proffer, respondent represented that petitioner agrees with the proffered
award. Id. Based on the record as a whole, the undersigned finds that petitioner is
entitled to an award as stated in the Proffer.
Pursuant to the terms stated in the Proffer, the undersigned awards petitioner
a lump sum payment of $112,654.00, representing compensation in the amount of
$110,000.00 for pain and suffering and $2,654.00 for actual unreimbursable
expenses in the form of a check payable to petitioner, Mary Stewart. This amount
represents compensation for all damages that would be available under § 15(a).
The clerk of the court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this
decision.4
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Nora Beth Dorsey
Nora Beth Dorsey
Chief Special Master
3 The combined Rule 4 report and proffer contains information regarding petitioner’s personal medical
history which is not generally included in a proffer, when separately filed. Thus, the undersigned will not
attach the proffer to the decision in this case.
4 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