Mary Annalee Hull v. HHS - HPV, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS) (2025)

Mary Annalee Hull filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program on January 10, 2025, alleging she suffered injuries, including postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), from two human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccinations received in April 2016. Petitioner counsel was Robert M.

Hatch of Bronster Fujichaku Robbins. Respondent counsel was Julia M.

Collison of the U.S. Department of Justice.

The petition was filed over eight years after the vaccinations and the onset of her symptoms in 2016. Petitioner argued for equitable tolling of the 36-month statute of limitations, claiming she was unaware of the potential adverse effects and the Vaccine Program until June 2020, and that the vaccine manufacturer engaged in fraudulent concealment.

Petitioner stated that at the time of vaccination, no Vaccine Information Statement (VIS) was provided, and no information about the Vaccine Program was relayed. Petitioner did not provide an affidavit from her parents, who presumably attended the vaccination appointments, regarding any information provided.

The public decision does not describe the specific onset of symptoms, medical records, diagnostic tests, or treatments. Respondent argued for dismissal due to untimeliness.

Chief Special Master Brian H. Corcoran noted that the Vaccine Act does not have a discovery rule and that lack of awareness of rights or the program does not support equitable tolling.

The court clarified that equitable tolling requires both diligent pursuit of rights and extraordinary circumstances preventing timely filing. Petitioner's arguments about the manufacturer's purported fraudulent conduct were deemed speculative and not evidentiarily supported, and not a basis for tolling.

The court also noted that the vaccination appointment records stated that risks, potential benefits, and anticipated side effects were discussed. Petitioner failed to establish both elements required for equitable tolling.

Consequently, the case was dismissed for being untimely filed. The public decision does not name any medical experts or detail the specific mechanism of injury.