Mary Elizabeth Haggerty v. HHS - MMR, encephalopathy and residual seizure disorder (1997)

Mary Elizabeth Haggerty, born November 21, 1991, received vaccinations on May 7, 1993. Her mother, Geraldine Haggerty, filed a claim alleging that Mary suffered an encephalopathy and residual seizure disorder as a direct result of receiving a DPT vaccination.

The special master found that Mary actually received an MMR vaccination, along with a Sabin polio vaccine, on that date. Approximately eight hours after the vaccinations, Mary suffered seizures and was diagnosed with Status Epilepticus, followed by an encephalopathy.

She was left severely impaired with the mental abilities of a six-month-old infant. The special master determined that because Mary received an MMR vaccine, her condition did not meet the Vaccine Injury Table criteria for a DPT-related injury.

The petitioner argued that the special master erred in determining the vaccine type, but the court affirmed the special master's findings, concluding that her decision was not arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion. The petition was ultimately denied.

The court reviewed the special master's decision under the arbitrary and capricious standard for factual findings. Petitioner argued that the special master overlooked testimony regarding the vaccine vial's appearance and that the special master erred in finding by a preponderance of the evidence that Mary acquired her measles antibodies through an MMR vaccination.

Petitioner also contended that the special master erred in assessing the credibility of Dr. Reilly and abused her discretion by disregarding the affidavit of petitioner's pediatric neurology expert, Dr.

Harvey Bennett, who stated that Mary's reaction could only have occurred after a DPT vaccine. The special master considered Dr.

Reilly's office records and Mary's official immunization records, which indicated an MMR vaccination with a specific lot number. Dr.

Reilly also testified that a DPT booster was not due for another six months and that he likely mistakenly wrote "DPT" in a booklet given to the petitioner. Furthermore, Mary's measles-titer test was positive, and the special master found it more likely that this was due to an MMR vaccination than natural exposure, given the low incidence of measles and petitioner's testimony of no known exposure.

The court found the special master's decision to be supported by a rational basis and not arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion, affirming the denial of compensation.