Court Opinion

ID: 4425624
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2019-08-14 20:01:54.67886+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:52:53.914660
License: Public Domain

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
                                 OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
                                          No. 18-729V
                                      Filed: May 10, 2019
                                        UNPUBLISHED

    VICKI HAVEL,

                        Petitioner,
    v.                                                       Special Processing Unit (SPU);
                                                             Damages Decision Based on Proffer;
    SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND                                  Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; Shoulder
    HUMAN SERVICES,                                          Injury Related to Vaccine
                                                             Administration (SIRVA)
                       Respondent.

John Robert Howie, Howie Law, PC, Dallas, TX, for petitioner.
Traci R. Patton, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

                               DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master:

       On May 23, 2018, 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 alleged that she suffered a left shoulder injury related to vaccine
administration (“SIRVA”) as a result of her October 10, 2016 influenza (“flu”)
vaccination. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the
Office of Special Masters.

      On April 1, 2019, a ruling on entitlement was issued, finding petitioner entitled to
compensation for her SIRVA. ECF No. 22. On May 7, 2019, respondent filed a proffer
on award of compensation (“Proffer”) indicating petitioner should be awarded

1 The undersigned intends to post this decision on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website.
This means the decision will be available to anyone with access to the internet. 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. Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the
action in this case, undersigned is required 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).

2National 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).
$79,502.51, representing compensation in the amount of $75,000.00 for pain and
suffering and $4,502.51 for past out of pocket medical expenses. Proffer at 1. In the
Proffer, respondent represented that petitioner agrees with the proffered award. Id.
Based on the record as a whole, the undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to an
award as stated in the Proffer.

       Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Proffer, the undersigned
awards petitioner a lump sum payment of $79,502.51, representing compensation
in the amount of $75,000.00 for pain and suffering and $4,502.51 for past out of
pocket medical expenses, in the form of a check payable to petitioner, Vicki
Havel. This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available
under § 15(a).

       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