Jackie Johns v. HHS - Influenza, Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) and chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP) (2019)

Filed 2018-05-24Decided 2019-09-11Vaccine Influenza
compensated$125,000

Case summary [AI summaries can sometimes make mistakes]

Jackie Johns filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program on May 24, 2018. He alleged that he suffered Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) and chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP) as a result of an influenza vaccine he received on September 26, 2016.

The petition stated that the vaccine was administered in the United States, that his injuries had persisted for more than six months, and that he had not filed a related action or been compensated for his vaccine-related injuries. The respondent denied that the influenza vaccine caused petitioner to suffer GBS, CIDP, or any other injury.

On June 26, 2019, the parties filed a joint stipulation for compensation. Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey found the stipulation reasonable and adopted it as the decision of the Court.

Jackie Johns was awarded a lump sum of $125,000.00 as compensation for all items of damages, payable to the petitioner. The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, diagnostic tests, treatments, or the mechanism of injury.

Petitioner's counsel was Matthew B. Vianello of Jacobson Press & Fields, and respondent's counsel was Sarah Christina Duncan of the U.S.

Department of Justice.

Theory of causation

Petitioner Jackie Johns alleged that an influenza vaccine received on September 26, 2016, caused Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) and chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP). The respondent denied causation. The parties filed a joint stipulation for compensation, which was adopted by Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey. The stipulation resulted in an award of $125,000.00. The public decision does not detail the specific theory of causation, medical experts, or the mechanism linking the vaccine to the alleged injuries. The case was resolved via stipulation, not through litigation of entitlement.

Source PDFs 2 total · 1 downloaded