VICP Registry Case Source Bundle
Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_19-vv-01283
Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_19-vv-01283
Petitioner: Kirk Richardson
Filed: 2019-08-27
Decided: 2021-11-29
Vaccine: Tdap
Vaccination date: 2018-06-19
Condition: Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS)
Outcome: compensated
Award amount USD: 135181

AI-assisted case summary:
Kirk Richardson filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program on August 27, 2019. He alleged that he suffered Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS) as a result of his tetanus, diphtheria, acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccination on June 19, 2018. Mr. Richardson further alleged that he experienced residual effects of his condition for more than six months, that no prior award or settlement had been made for his condition, and that his vaccine was administered in the United States. The respondent denied that the Tdap vaccine caused Mr. Richardson's GBS or any other injury. Despite the respondent's denial, the parties filed a joint stipulation for damages on November 2, 2021. Special Master Daniel T. Horner reviewed the stipulation and found it reasonable, adopting it as the decision of the Court. Pursuant to the stipulation, Mr. Richardson was awarded a lump sum of $135,181.05, payable by check to the petitioner. This amount was intended to compensate for all items of damages available under the Vaccine Act. The decision was issued by Special Master Daniel T. Horner on November 29, 2021. Petitioner counsel was Leah Durant of the Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, and respondent counsel was Kyle Pozza of the U.S. Department of Justice.

Theory of causation field:
Petitioner alleged that a June 19, 2018 tetanus, diphtheria, acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccination caused Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS) with residual effects lasting more than six months. Respondent denied causation. The parties filed a joint stipulation for damages, which was adopted by Special Master Daniel T. Horner. The stipulation resulted in an award of $135,181.05. The specific medical theory of causation, expert testimony, or mechanism of injury was not detailed in the provided public decision text, which was based on a stipulation. The decision date was November 29, 2021. Petitioner counsel was Leah Durant, and respondent counsel was Kyle Pozza.

Public staged source text:

================================================================================
DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_19-vv-01283-0
Date issued/filed: 2021-11-29
Pages: 7
Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 11/02/2021) regarding 35 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer Signed by Special Master Daniel T. Horner. (mly) Service on parties made.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1:19-vv-01283-UNJ Document 39 Filed 11/29/21 Page 1 of 7
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 19-1283V
Filed: November 2, 2021
UNPUBLISHED
KIRK RICHARDSON,
Petitioner,
Joint Stipulation on Damages;
v.
Tetanus, diphtheria, acellular
pertussis (Tdap) vaccine; Guillain-
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND
Barre syndrome (GBS)
HUMAN SERVICES,
Respondent.
Leah Durant, Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, Washington, D.C., for petitioner.
Kyle Pozza, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1
On August 27, 2019, 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 he suffered Guillain-Barre syndrome (“GBS”) as a
result of his June 19, 2018 tetanus, diphtheria, acellular pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccination.
Petition at 1; Stipulation, filed November 2, 2021, at ¶ 4. Petitioner further alleges that
he has experienced the residual effects of his condition for more than six months, that
there has been no prior award or settlement of a civil action for damages as a result of
his condition, and that his vaccine was administered in the United States. Petition at 4;
Stipulation at ¶¶ 3-5. “Respondent denies that the Tdap vaccine caused petitioner to
suffer GBS or any other injury, and/or his current condition.” Stipulation at ¶ 6.
Nevertheless, on November 2, 2021, the parties filed the attached joint
stipulation, stating that a decision should be entered awarding compensation. I find the
1 Because this decision contains a reasoned explanation for the special master’s action in this case, it will
be posted on the United States Court of Federal Claims’ website in accordance with the E-Government
Act of 2002. See 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of Electronic
Government Services). 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 the special master, upon review, agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, it will be
redacted from public access.
2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for
ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. §
300aa (2012).

Case 1:19-vv-01283-UNJ Document 39 Filed 11/29/21 Page 2 of 7
stipulation reasonable and adopt it as the decision of the Court in awarding damages,
on the terms set forth therein.
Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Stipulation, I award the following
compensation:
A lump sum of $135,181.05 in the form of a check payable to petitioner.
Stipulation at ¶ 8. This amount represents compensation for all items of
damages that would be available under § 15(a). Id.
In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the
clerk of the court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this decision.3
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Daniel T. Horner
Daniel T. Horner
Special Master
3 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

Case 1:19-vv-01283-UNJ Document 39 Filed 11/29/21 Page 3 of 7

Case 1:19-vv-01283-UNJ Document 39 Filed 11/29/21 Page 4 of 7

Case 1:19-vv-01283-UNJ Document 39 Filed 11/29/21 Page 5 of 7

Case 1:19-vv-01283-UNJ Document 39 Filed 11/29/21 Page 6 of 7

Case 1:19-vv-01283-UNJ Document 39 Filed 11/29/21 Page 7 of 7