Mindy Schuehrer v. HHS - Influenza, Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) (2023)
Case summary [AI summaries can sometimes make mistakes]
On May 13, 2021, Mindy Schuehrer, through her legal guardian Kelley Kuhn, filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. The petition alleged that Ms.
Schuehrer suffered Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) as a result of receiving an influenza vaccine on September 19, 2018. The petition stated that the vaccine was received in the United States, that the GBS and its sequelae lasted for more than six months, and that no other action or compensation had been sought for these injuries.
The respondent, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, filed a Rule 4(c) report on August 12, 2022, conceding that Ms. Schuehrer's claim met the Table criteria for GBS and was therefore entitled to a presumption of vaccine causation.
The respondent agreed that all legal prerequisites for compensation under the Act had been satisfied. Based on the respondent's concession and the evidence of record, Chief Special Master Brian H.
Corcoran issued a ruling on entitlement on August 12, 2022, finding Ms. Schuehrer eligible for compensation.
Subsequently, on June 6, 2023, the parties filed a stipulation for damages. The respondent proffered an award of $100,000.00 for pain and suffering and $2,414.23 to satisfy a State of Michigan Medicaid lien.
Ms. Schuehrer, through her legal guardian, agreed with the proffered award.
Chief Special Master Corcoran issued a decision awarding damages on June 6, 2023. The award consisted of a lump sum payment of $100,000.00 payable to Kelley Kuhn as legal guardian of Mindy Schuehrer for pain and suffering, and a lump sum payment of $2,414.23 payable jointly to Kelley Kuhn as legal guardian and the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services to satisfy the Medicaid lien.
The total award was $102,414.23. Petitioner was represented by Laura Levenberg of Muller Brazil, LLP, and respondent was represented by Martin Conway Galvin of the U.S.
Department of Justice. The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, diagnostic tests, treatments, or the medical expert witnesses involved in this case.