Alcida Ortiz v. HHS - Influenza, shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (2021)

Filed 2020-12-02Decided 2021-02-01Vaccine Influenza
compensated$92,500

Case summary [AI summaries can sometimes make mistakes]

Alcida Ortiz filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program on December 2, 2020, alleging she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) as a result of an influenza vaccine administered on September 20, 2016. Petitioner stated she received the vaccine in the United States, experienced residual effects for more than six months, and had no prior award or settlement for damages related to her condition.

The respondent denied that Petitioner sustained a Table SIRVA within the Table time period and denied that the flu vaccine caused her injury or current condition. Despite these denials, on November 25, 2020, the parties filed a joint stipulation for compensation.

Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran reviewed the stipulation, found it reasonable, and adopted it as his decision.

He awarded Alcida Ortiz a lump sum of $92,500.00, payable to Petitioner, as compensation for all items of damages. The decision was issued on February 1, 2021.

Petitioner was represented by Brian L. Cinelli of Marcus & Cinelli, LLP, and Respondent was represented by Catherine Elizabeth Stolar of the U.S.

Department of Justice.

Theory of causation

Petitioner Alcida Ortiz alleged a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) following an influenza vaccine on September 20, 2016. Respondent denied that Petitioner sustained a Table SIRVA within the Table time period and denied that the flu vaccine caused her injury. The parties filed a joint stipulation for compensation, and Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran adopted the stipulation, awarding Petitioner $92,500.00. The specific medical mechanism, onset, symptoms, diagnostic tests, treatments, or expert opinions were not described in the provided public decision text. The theory of causation is based on the parties' stipulation rather than a detailed factual finding or expert testimony presented in the decision.

Source PDFs 2 total · 1 downloaded