Court Opinion

ID: 4149878
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2017-03-02 21:02:50.0526+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:19:40.109759
License: Public Domain

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
                                 OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
                                          No. 15-0366V
                                   Filed: November 18, 2016
                                        UNPUBLISHED

****************************
BRADLEY J. RICHARDSON,                  *
                                        *
                    Petitioner,         *      Joint Stipulation on Damages;
v.                                      *      Influenza (“Flu”) Vaccine; Guillain-
                                        *      Barré Syndrome (“GBS”); Special
SECRETARY OF HEALTH                     *      Processing Unit (“SPU”)
AND HUMAN SERVICES,                     *
                                        *
                    Respondent.         *
                                        *
****************************
Isaiah R. Kalinowski, Maglio Christopher & Toale, PA, Washington, DC, for petitioner.
Jennifer L. Reynaud, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

                              DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master:

       On April 10, 2015, Bradley J. Richardson (“petitioner”) 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 he suffered Guillain-
Barré syndrome as a result of receiving an influenza (“flu”) vaccine on November 1,
2012. Petition at 1-2; Stipulation, filed November 17, 2016, at ¶ 2, 4. Petitioner further
alleges that he suffered the residual effects of his alleged injury for more than six
months. Petition at 3; Stipulation at ¶ 4. “Respondent denies that petitioner’s alleged
GBS and residual effects were caused-in-fact by the flu vaccine, denies that he suffered
the residual effects of his alleged injury for more than six months; and denies that the flu
vaccine caused petitioner any other injury or his current condition.” Stipulation at ¶ 6.

       Nevertheless, on November 17, 2016, the parties filed the attached joint
stipulation, stating that a decision should be entered awarding compensation. The

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  Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the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).
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 $100,000.00, in the form of a check payable to petitioner.
        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.

                                                      2