Jared DeFazio v. HHS - DPT, residual seizure disorder conceded as vaccine-caused, but ADHD, depression, and behavioral/educational difficulties found not to be sequelae (1997)

Jared DeFazio, a minor, through his parents, filed a petition for compensation under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, alleging injuries resulting from three diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus (DPT) vaccinations administered on April 13, May 11, and June 16, 1977. Within days after the first two vaccinations, and possibly after the third, Jared experienced seizures.

He was prescribed anti-convulsant medication after the second vaccination and continued to have occasional seizures until at least November 1980, ceasing medication in 1984. At the time of the court's review, Jared no longer had an active seizure disorder but suffered from nystagmus causing legal blindness, attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), depression, and behavioral and educational problems.

The respondent conceded that Jared's residual seizure disorder was vaccine-caused. The respondent's Rule 4(b) report also initially stated that compensation for Jared's educational and behavioral difficulties as sequelae of the injury was appropriate, while disputing compensation for his visual problems, an issue Jared later conceded.

The central dispute became whether Jared's current behavioral and educational difficulties were sequelae of the vaccine-caused residual seizure disorder. The special master initially ordered life care plans, interpreting the respondent's report as conceding compensability for these later issues.

However, at the first damages hearing, the respondent clarified that it only conceded the residual seizure disorder itself and that petitioner still needed to prove the causal link between the disorder and the ADHD, depression, and other current problems. Over petitioner's objection, the special master allowed the respondent to present additional medical testimony on this issue at a second hearing.

Following this second hearing, the special master found that Jared's current behavioral and educational difficulties were not caused by his vaccine-related residual seizure disorder, stating that his early problems were primarily behavioral, his seizures were not severe enough to cause ADHD, and his depression, ADHD, and other behavioral problems were not sequelae of the Table injury. Consequently, the special master dismissed the petition on June 25, 1997, denying compensation for all items in Jared's life care plan.

Jared sought review, arguing that the special master should have been bound by the respondent's earlier Rule 4(b) position and should not have allowed the respondent to change its stance. The reviewing court, Judge Andewelt presiding, affirmed the dismissal.

The court held that the Vaccine Act and its rules grant special masters broad discretion to gather relevant medical evidence, and allowing the later testimony was not an abuse of discretion, especially as the causal link was crucial to the merits. The court affirmed the denial of compensation, finding that Jared failed to prove his current conditions were sequelae of the Table injury.

The court noted that an alternative ground for dismissal, Jared's alleged future refusal of treatment, was not sufficiently supported by the record and therefore did not form the basis for affirming the special master's decision. The public opinion does not identify Jared's parents by name.