Thomas v. HHS - DPT, other (1993)

Petitioners filed a claim under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 on behalf of their son, Thomas, alleging injuries shortly after receiving the diphtheria, pertussis, and tetanus (DPT) vaccine. The Special Master initially found that the petitioners were entitled to compensation and determined the entitlement amount.

Both parties waived their right to seek review of this decision, and the Clerk of the Court of Federal Claims entered judgment on May 22, 1992. The petitioners elected to accept this judgment on June 15, 1992.

Subsequently, on July 6, 1992, the petitioners' counsel filed an application for attorney's fees and costs, which was amended on July 20, 1992. On August 28, 1992, the Special Master issued a decision awarding $16,157.01 for attorney's fees and costs.

This decision did not address the petitioners' request for damages for pain and suffering and future earnings. Neither party filed a motion for review of the August 28, 1992 decision, and the Clerk of the Court of Federal Claims entered judgment on September 29, 1992.

On November 16, 1992, 48 days after the Clerk entered judgment, the petitioners filed a motion with the Special Master requesting that she amend her August 28, 1992 decision to include an award of $13,842.99 for pain and suffering and future earnings. The respondent argued that the Special Master lacked jurisdiction to alter a decision after the Clerk had entered final judgment.

The Special Master rejected this argument and issued an order on January 11, 1993, amending her August 28, 1992 decision to include $13,842.99 for pain and suffering and emotional distress, determining she had jurisdiction to do so. The respondent filed a motion with the court to review the Special Master's January 11, 1993 order, arguing the Special Master lacked jurisdiction.

The court reviewed the Special Master's legal conclusions under the "not in accordance with law" standard. The court found that the Vaccine Act's plain language indicated that a Special Master loses jurisdiction over a decision's subject matter once the Clerk enters judgment, either upon a timely motion for review or after the 30-day period for such a motion expires.

The court also addressed the Special Master's assertion of inherent authority to correct mistakes, akin to Rule 60(b) of the Rules of the Court of Federal Claims. The court determined that Special Masters do not possess such inherent power and that Rule 60(b) is not referenced in the Vaccine Rules, thus not applicable to Special Masters.

The court concluded that Special Masters cannot expand their jurisdiction beyond the limits prescribed by Congress. Therefore, the court granted the respondent's motion to vacate the Special Master's January 11, 1993 order and reinstated the court's judgment entered on September 29, 1992.

The petitioners were not awarded the $13,842.99 for pain and suffering and emotional distress due to the jurisdictional issue. The public decision does not describe the specific injury or symptoms suffered by Thomas, the specific mechanism of injury, or name the petitioner's counsel or respondent's counsel.