VICP Registry Case Source Bundle Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-00568 Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-00568 Petitioner: Nancy O’Leary Filed: 2021-11-16 Decided: 2021-12-17 Vaccine: influenza Vaccination date: 2017-11-17 Condition: shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) Outcome: compensated Award amount USD: 84532 AI-assisted case summary: Nancy O’Leary filed a petition for compensation on November 16, 2021, alleging that she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) caused in fact by an influenza vaccine received on November 17, 2017. Ms. O’Leary stated that the vaccine was administered in the United States and that she experienced residual effects of her SIRVA for more than six months. She also affirmed that no civil action had been filed and no other compensation had been received for her condition. The respondent denied that Ms. O’Leary sustained a SIRVA Table injury or that the influenza vaccine caused her condition. Despite the respondent's denial, the parties filed a joint stipulation on November 15, 2021, agreeing that compensation should be awarded. Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran reviewed the stipulation, found it reasonable, and adopted it as the decision awarding damages. Ms. O’Leary was awarded a lump sum of $84,532.22, payable to her. The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, medical tests performed, treatments received, or the mechanism of injury. Petitioner was represented by Leigh Finfer of Muller Brazil, LLP, and Respondent was represented by Lynn Christina Schlie of the U.S. Department of Justice. Theory of causation field: Petitioner Nancy O’Leary alleged a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) caused in fact by an influenza vaccine administered on November 17, 2017. The respondent denied that the injury was a SIRVA Table injury or that the vaccine caused the condition. The parties filed a joint stipulation agreeing to an award. Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran adopted the stipulation, awarding $84,532.22. The public decision does not specify the theory of causation beyond the general allegation of SIRVA, nor does it name any medical experts or detail the specific mechanism of injury. The award was based on a stipulation, not a finding of causation after litigation. Petitioner's counsel was Leigh Finfer, and Respondent's counsel was Lynn Christina Schlie. The decision date was December 17, 2021. Public staged source text: ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_20-vv-00568-0 Date issued/filed: 2021-12-17 Pages: 7 Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 11/16/2021) regarding 25 DECISION Stipulation/Proffer Signed by Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran. (sw) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:20-vv-00568-UNJ Document 29 Filed 12/17/21 Page 1 of 7 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 20-0568V UNPUBLISHED NANCY O’LEARY, Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: November 16, 2021 v. Special Processing Unit (SPU); Joint SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND Stipulation on Damages; Influenza HUMAN SERVICES, (Flu) Vaccine; Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration Respondent. (SIRVA) Leigh Finfer, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for Petitioner. Lynn Christina Schlie, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1 On May 7, 2020, Nancy O’Leary 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 she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) caused in fact by the influenza vaccine on November 17, 2017. Petition at 1, ¶¶ 2, 20; Stipulation, filed at Nov. 15, 2021, ¶¶ 1-2, 4. Petitioner further alleges that she received the vaccine in the United States, that she suffered the residual effects of her SIRVA for more than six months, and that neither she nor any other party has filed a civil action or received compensation for her SIRVA. Petition at ¶¶ 2, 20-21; Stipulation at ¶¶ 3-5. “Respondent denies that [P]etitioner sustained a SIRVA Table injury following the flu vaccination, and further denies that the flu vaccine caused [P]etitioner to suffer a shoulder injury or any other injury of [P]etitioner’s current condition.” Stipulation at ¶ 6. 1 Because this unpublished Decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in accordance with the E- Government Act of 2002. 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, upon review, I agree that the identified material fits within this definition, I will redact such material 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 section references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2012). Case 1:20-vv-00568-UNJ Document 29 Filed 12/17/21 Page 2 of 7 Nevertheless, on November 15, 2021, the parties filed the attached joint stipulation, stating that a decision should be entered awarding compensation. I find the stipulation reasonable and adopt it as my decision 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 $84,532.22 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 Section 15(a). Id. I approve the requested amount for Petitioner’s compensation. 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/Brian H. Corcoran Brian H. Corcoran Chief 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 1:20-vv-00568-UNJ Document 29 Filed 12/17/21 Page 3 of 7 Case 1:20-vv-00568-UNJ Document 29 Filed 12/17/21 Page 4 of 7 Case 1:20-vv-00568-UNJ Document 29 Filed 12/17/21 Page 5 of 7 Case 1:20-vv-00568-UNJ Document 29 Filed 12/17/21 Page 6 of 7 Case 1:20-vv-00568-UNJ Document 29 Filed 12/17/21 Page 7 of 7