{"package_id":"USCOURTS-cofc-1_91-vv-01567","decision_granule_id":"USCOURTS-cofc-1_91-vv-01567-cl6645321","petitioner_identifier":"Donnella Raspberry","is_minor":null,"age_at_vaccination":null,"age_unit_raw":null,"vaccine_type":"DPT","vaccination_date":"1990-08-20","condition_raw":"death","condition_category":"death","autism_spectrum_adjacent":0,"outcome":"dismissed","award_amount_usd":null,"decision_date":"1995-02-07","extraction_version":"gemini-v2","extracted_at":"2026-04-30T14:09:56.287663+00:00","number_of_concurrent_vaccines":1,"dose_number":null,"time_to_onset_days":null,"theory_of_causation":"DPT vaccine, August 20, 1990 — alleged injury/death of daughter Shanelle Eastling. SM denied February 3, 1994 (basis not described in available document). Available document (Feb 7, 1995): CFC Judge Andewelt GRANTED reconsideration — motion for review sent 2 days early via Airborne Express overnight; carrier failed to deliver on time; motion received 1 day late March 8, 1994. Equitable tolling applies under Irwin v. Veterans Affairs presumption; petitioner exercised due diligence; carrier failure not petitioner's fault. June 2, 1994 dismissal vacated. DB had petition_filed_date = CFC order date (wrong; 91-vv case).","is_death":1,"date_of_death":null,"petition_filed_date":"1995-02-07","case_summary":"Donnella Raspberry filed a petition under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Compensation Program seeking compensation for the death of her daughter, Shanelle Eastling. Shanelle received a DPT vaccine on August 20, 1990. The specific cause of death and the special master's grounds for denial are not described in the available case document, which concerns a motion for reconsideration of a dismissal for untimely filing.\n\nThe special master denied the petition on February 3, 1994. Under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(e)(1), petitioners have thirty days from the special master's decision to file a motion for review in the Court of Federal Claims. Petitioner's deadline was therefore March 7, 1994. On March 5, 1994 — two days before the deadline — petitioner's counsel sent the motion for review to the court via Airborne Express with a guaranteed overnight delivery commitment. The carrier failed to make the guaranteed delivery. The motion did not arrive at the court until March 8, 1994, one day after the deadline. On June 2, 1994, the court dismissed the petition for untimely filing. Petitioner then filed a motion for reconsideration.\n\nJudge Andewelt, writing for the Court of Federal Claims on February 7, 1995, granted the motion for reconsideration and vacated the June 2, 1994, dismissal order. The court held that the doctrine of equitable tolling applies to the thirty-day filing period of § 300aa-12(e)(1). Relying on Irwin v. Department of Veterans Affairs, 498 U.S. 89 (1990), the court noted that there is a rebuttable presumption that equitable tolling is available in suits against the government, and nothing in the Vaccine Act rebutted that presumption for this provision. The court then applied the equitable tolling analysis and found that petitioner had exercised the requisite due diligence: counsel filed the motion two days before the deadline using a guaranteed overnight carrier — a commercially reasonable precaution. The one-day delay was caused entirely by the carrier's failure to honor its delivery guarantee, which was a circumstance beyond petitioner's control and not attributable to any negligence on her part. The June 2, 1994, dismissal order was vacated and the case was reinstated for further proceedings on the motion for review.","is_minor_inferred":null,"is_pediatric_broad":0,"special_master":null,"petitioner_identifier_original":null,"caption_petitioner_name":null,"petitioner_attorney_name":null,"petitioner_attorney_firm":null,"petitioner_attorney_location":null,"adjudicator_name":null,"caption_people_backfilled_at":null,"attorney_canonical_keys":null,"firm_canonical_key":null,"package_title":"Raspberry v. Secretary of Department of Health","canonical_url":"https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_91-vv-01567","plain_text_url":"https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_91-vv-01567.txt","json_url":"https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_91-vv-01567.json","source_documents":[{"granule_id":"USCOURTS-cofc-1_91-vv-01567-cl6645321","title":"Raspberry v. Secretary of Department of Health","docket_text":"lead-opinion","date_issued":"1995-02-07","pdf_url":"https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/6762582/raspberry-v-secretary-of-department-of-health/","pdf_bytes":null,"triage_decision":"keep","triage_reason":"recovered via CL opinion 6645321 (html_with_citations)","download_status":"ok","registry_pdf_url":"https://vicp-registry.org/pdf/USCOURTS-cofc-1_91-vv-01567/USCOURTS-cofc-1_91-vv-01567-cl6645321"}]}