In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS 

No. 15-1459V 

Filed: September 16, 2016 

UNPUBLISHED 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

JENNIFER HINKLEY, as Personal * 

Representative of the Estate of * 

CHARLES TUTTLE, * 

 * 

 Petitioner, * Joint Stipulation on Damages; 

v. * Influenza (“Flu”) Vaccination; 

 * Guillain-Barre Syndrome (“GBS”); 

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Special Processing Unit (“SPU”) 

AND HUMAN SERVICES, * 

 * 

 Respondent. * 

 * 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Christiane Derby Williams, Terry, Garmey & Associates, Portland, OR, for petitioner. 

Julia Wernett McInerny, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent. 

DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master: 

 On December 3, 2015, petitioner, as Personal Representative of the Estate of 

Charles Tuttle (“Charles”) filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine 

Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.,

2 (the “Vaccine Act”). 

Petitioner alleges that Charles suffered Guillain-Barre Syndrome (“GBS”) as a result of 

his influenza (“flu’) vaccination on October 21, 2013, and that he subsequently died as a 

result of his vaccine injury. Petition at 1; Stipulation, September 15, 2016, at ¶¶ 2, 4. 

Petitioner further indicates that that there has been no prior award or settlement of a 

civil action for damages as a result of Charles’s injury and death. Petition at ¶17; 

Stipulation at ¶ 5. “Respondent denies that the flu vaccine caused Charles’s alleged 

GBS, any other injury, or his death.” Stipulation at ¶ 6. 

 

1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the 

undersigned intends to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in accordance with 

the E-Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of 

Electronic Government Services). In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), petitioner has 14 days to 

identify and move to redact medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute an 

unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits 

within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from public access. 

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for 

ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 

300aa (2012). 
2

Nevertheless, on September 15, 2016, the parties filed the attached joint 

stipulation, stating that a decision should be entered awarding compensation. The 

undersigned finds the stipulation reasonable and adopts it as the decision of the Court 

in awarding damages, on the terms set forth therein. 

The parties stipulate that petitioner shall receive the following compensation: 

A lump sum of $220,000.00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner as 

Personal Representative of Charles Tuttle’s estate. Stipulation at ¶ 8. This 

amount represents compensation for all items of damages that would be 

available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). Id. 

The undersigned approves the requested amount for petitioner’s compensation. 

In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the clerk of 

the court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this decision.3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 s/Nora Beth Dorsey 

 Nora Beth Dorsey 

 Chief Special Master 

 

3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice 

renouncing the right to seek review.