United States Court of Federal Claims, 2014

Shinn v. Hhs

United States Court of Federal Claims · Decided August 8, 2014 · George L. Hastings

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 99-542V (Not to be published)

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

ADAEL SHINN, mother and * natural guardian of P.S., a minor, * *

Petitioner, * * Filed: July 17, 2014 v. * * Decision on Attorney’s SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND * Fees and Costs HUMAN SERVICES * *

Respondent. * * *************************

DECISION1 (ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS) In this case under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program,2 I issued a decision on November 26, 2013. On July 16, 2014, the parties filed a joint stipulation of facts concerning attorneys’ fees and costs in this matter. The parties’ stipulation requests a total payment of $16,500.00, representing attorney’s fees and costs for work performed by the law firm of Clifford J. Shoemaker.

I find that this petition was brought in good faith and that there existed a reasonable basis for the claim. Therefore, an award for fees and costs is appropriate, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(b) and (e)(1). Further, the proposed amount seems reasonable and appropriate. Accordingly, I hereby award the total $16,500.00 as a lump sum in the form of a check payable jointly to petitioner and petitioner’s counsel, Clifford J. Shoemaker.

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 The undersigned intends 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)). As provided by Vaccine Rule 18(b), each party has 14 days within which to request redaction “of any information furnished by that party (1) that is trade secret or commercial or financial information and is privileged or confidential, or (2) that are medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy.” Vaccine Rule 18(b). Otherwise, “the entire” decision will be available to the public. Id. 2 The applicable statutory provisions defining the program are found at 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-10 et seq. (2006). 3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by filing a joint notice renouncing the right to seek review.

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