Rhonda Rose v. HHS - Td, shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) (2023)
Case summary [AI summaries can sometimes make mistakes]
Rhonda Rose filed a petition on January 16, 2020, seeking compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. She alleged that she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) after receiving a tetanus and diphtheria (Td) vaccine on August 10, 2017.
Ms. Rose stated that she received the vaccine in the United States and experienced residual effects of her injury for more than six months.
The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, denied that Ms. Rose sustained a SIRVA Table Injury, denied that the vaccine caused her alleged shoulder injury or any other injury, and denied that her current condition was a sequela of a vaccine-related injury.
Despite these denials, on February 13, 2023, the parties filed a joint stipulation agreeing that compensation should be awarded. Chief Special Master Brian H.
Corcoran reviewed the stipulation, found it reasonable, and adopted it as the court's decision. Ms.
Rose was awarded a lump sum of $15,000.00, payable by check to Petitioner, as compensation for all items of damages available under Section 15(a) of the Vaccine Act. The decision was issued on March 17, 2023.
Petitioner was represented by Leigh Finfer of Muller Brazil, LLP, and Respondent was represented by Zoe Wade of the U.S. Department of Justice.
The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, medical examinations, diagnostic tests, treatments, or expert witnesses involved in this case.
Theory of causation
Petitioner Rhonda Rose alleged a Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA) following a Td vaccination on August 10, 2017. Respondent denied the alleged injury and causation. The parties filed a joint stipulation on February 13, 2023, agreeing to an award. Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran adopted the stipulation, awarding Petitioner $15,000.00 as a lump sum for all damages under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). The case was compensated based on a stipulation, and the public decision does not detail the specific mechanism of injury, expert testimony, or the evidence considered beyond the stipulation. Petitioner was represented by Leigh Finfer (Muller Brazil, LLP) and Respondent by Zoe Wade (U.S. Department of Justice). The decision date was March 17, 2023.
Source PDFs
USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-00056