Issam Jubil v. HHS - Influenza, encephalitis and acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM) (2021)

Filed 2019-12-12Decided 2021-10-29Vaccine Influenza
compensated$62,808cognitive/developmental

Case summary [AI summaries can sometimes make mistakes]

On December 12, 2019, Issam Jubil, as the parent and natural guardian of R.J., a minor, filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Program. The petition alleged that the influenza and hepatitis A vaccines R.J. received on February 16, 2018, caused him to suffer from encephalitis and acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM).

The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, denied that the vaccines caused R.J.'s alleged injuries. However, the parties reached a stipulation for settlement.

Under the stipulation, the respondent agreed to award compensation to the petitioner. The award includes a lump sum of $60,000.00 payable to the petitioner for the benefit of R.J., and a lump sum payment of $2,807.68 to satisfy a Medicaid lien from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, payable jointly to the petitioner and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Casualty Recovery Unit.

This total award of $62,808 represents compensation for all damages available under the Vaccine Act. Special Master Thomas L.

Gowen adopted the parties' stipulation and ordered judgment to be entered accordingly on October 29, 2021. Petitioner's counsel was Bridget C.

McCullough of Muller Brazil, LLP, and respondent's counsel was Dhairya D. Jani of the U.S.

Department of Justice.

Theory of causation

Petitioner alleged that the influenza and hepatitis A vaccines administered on February 16, 2018, caused R.J. to suffer from encephalitis and acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM). The respondent denied that the vaccines caused R.J.'s alleged injuries. The parties reached a stipulation for settlement, agreeing to an award of $62,808, comprising a $60,000 lump sum for R.J. and $2,807.68 to satisfy a Medicaid lien. Special Master Thomas L. Gowen adopted the stipulation on October 29, 2021. The public decision does not describe the specific medical experts, clinical details of the injury onset or progression, diagnostic tests, treatments, or the mechanism of causation. The theory of causation is not detailed in the public decision beyond the petitioner's allegation and the respondent's denial, with the case resolved via stipulation.

Source PDFs 2 total · 1 downloaded