I.K.L.R. v. HHS - Varicella, chronic urticaria (2020)

Filed 2018-08-10Decided 2020-07-01Vaccine Varicella
compensated

Case summary [AI summaries can sometimes make mistakes]

On August 10, 2018, Rosa M. Rios Morales and Juan Enrique Lozada Virella, parents of the minor I.K.L.R., filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.

They alleged that I.K.L.R. received a varicella vaccine on or about August 14, 2015, and subsequently developed chronic urticaria, or that the vaccine aggravated a pre-existing condition. The petitioners claimed that I.K.L.R. experienced residual effects of the condition for more than six months.

The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, denied that the varicella vaccine caused or aggravated I.K.L.R.'s alleged chronic urticaria or any other injury. The varicella vaccine is listed on the Vaccine Injury Table.

On July 1, 2020, the parties filed a stipulation for an award. The stipulation stated that the parties agreed to settle the issues and that a decision should be entered awarding compensation.

The award was to be an amount sufficient to purchase an annuity contract, representing compensation for all damages available under the program for the alleged injury. Special Master Thomas L.

Gowen adopted the stipulation and awarded compensation accordingly. The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, medical tests, treatments, or expert witnesses.

Roberto Ruiz-Comas represented the petitioners, and Ryan D. Pyles represented the respondent.

Theory of causation

Petitioners alleged that the varicella vaccine administered on or about August 14, 2015, caused or aggravated I.K.L.R.'s chronic urticaria, resulting in residual effects for more than six months. The varicella vaccine is listed on the Vaccine Injury Table. The respondent denied causation. The parties reached a stipulation for award on July 1, 2020, agreeing to settle the issues and award compensation sufficient to purchase an annuity contract for all damages. Special Master Thomas L. Gowen adopted the stipulation. The public decision does not detail the specific mechanism of injury, expert testimony, or the breakdown of the award beyond the annuity purchase. Roberto Ruiz-Comas was counsel for petitioners, and Ryan D. Pyles was counsel for respondent.

Source PDFs 2 total · 1 downloaded