United States Court of Federal Claims, 2013

Corey Williams, Parent of V.W., a Minor v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Decided November 19, 2013 · Special Master Hastings

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

No. 03-342V

Filed: November 19, 2013

Not to be Published **************************** COREY WILLIAMS, parent of V.W., * a minor, *

* Autism; Attorneys’ Fees and Costs Petitioner, *

* v. *

* SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND * HUMAN SERVICES *

* Respondent. *

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

DECISION AWARDING ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS1 On October 30, 2013, petitioner filed a motion for attorneys’ fees and costs. In compliance with Vaccine General Order #9, petitioner also filed a statement on October 30, 2013, indicating she personally incurred no costs that are compensable under § 15 (e)(1).

On November 18, 2013, the parties filed a Stipulation of Facts Concerning Attorneys’ Fees and Costs. After informal discussions, the parties have agreed on $12,217.77 in attorneys’ fees and costs.

The request for attorneys’ fees and costs is granted. Petitioner is awarded reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to §§ 15(b) and (e)(1), as I find that the petition was brought in good faith and upon a reasonable basis, and the amounts requested are reasonable and appropriate.

Pursuant to §15(e), I award a lump sum of $12, 217.772 to be paid in the form of a check payable jointly to the petitioner and petitioner’s counsel, Conway, Homer & Chin-Caplan, P.C.

In the absence of a timely-filed motion for review filed pursuant to Appendix B of the Rules of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, the Clerk of the court shall enter judgment in accordance herewith.3 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/George L. Hastings, Jr. George L. Hastings, Jr. Special Master

1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I intend to post this decision on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, § 205, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (codified as amended at 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2006)). In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), a party has 14 days to identify and move to redact medical or other information, that satisfies the criteria in 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(d)(4)(B). Further, consistent with the rule requirement, a motion for redaction must include a proposed redacted decision. If, upon review, I agree that the identified material fits within the requirements of that provision, I will redact such material from public access. 2 This amount is intended to cover all legal expenses incurred in this matter. This award encompasses all charges by the attorney against a client, “advanced costs” as well as fees for legal services rendered. Furthermore, § 15(e)(3) prevents an attorney from charging or collecting fees (including costs) that would be in addition to the amount awarded herein. See generally Beck v. Sec’y of Dep't Health and Human Services, 924 F.2d 1029 (Fed. Cir. 1991). 3 Entry of judgment can be expedited by each party’s filing of a notice renouncing the right to seek review. See Vaccine Rule 11(a).

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.