United States Court of Federal Claims, 2014

Weil v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Decided November 18, 2014 · Nora Beth Dorsey

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

Filed: October 29, 2014 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * UNPUBLISHED THOMAS WEIL, * No. 13-660V *

Petitioner, * * Special Master Dorsey v. * * Attorneys’ Fees and Costs; SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Reasonable Amount Requested to which AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Respondent Does not Object. *

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

Sherry Kay Drew, McDowell & Drew, Ltd., Glenview, IL, for petitioner.

Lindsay Corliss, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS DECISION1

On September 10, 2013, Thomas Weil (“petitioner”) filed a petition pursuant to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.2 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to -34 (2006).

Petitioner alleged that she developed Guillain-Barré Syndrome (“GBS”) as a result of receiving an influenza (flu) vaccine on October 30, 2012. See Petition at 1-2. On April 24, 2014, a decision was entered based on the parties’ stipulation awarding compensation to petitioner.

On October 27, 2014, petitioner filed an application for attorney’s fees and costs requesting a total award to petitioner of attorneys’ fees and costs in the amount of $7,610.13. In accordance with General Order #9, petitioner’s counsel represents that petitioner did not personally advance any reimbursable costs in pursuit of his claim. On October 28, 2014, counsel for respondent contacted the court via e-mail to state that respondent would not be filing an objection to petitioner’s attorney’s fee and cost application and that respondent agrees that the amount requested is not unreasonable. See Informal Communication docketed Oct. 29, 2014.

The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs. 42 U.S.C. § 300 aa-15(e). Based on the reasonableness of petitioner’s application and respondent’s lack of objection, the undersigned GRANTS the request for approval and payment of attorneys’ fees and costs.

Accordingly, an award should be made as follows: in the form of a check jointly payable to petitioner and to petitioner’s attorney, Sherry K. Drew, of McDowell & Drew, Ltd., in the amount of $7,610.13.

In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the clerk of the court SHALL ENTER JUDGMENT in accordance with the terms of the parties’ stipulation.3

IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Nora Beth Dorsey Nora Beth Dorsey

Special Master

1 Because this decision contains a reasoned explanation for the undersigned’s action in this case, the undersigned intends to post this decision on the website of the United States Court of Federal Claims, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (Dec. 17, 2002). 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 a trade secret or commercial or financial in substance and is privileged or confidential; or (2) that includes medical files or 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 National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program is set forth in Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755, codified as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to -34 (2006) (Vaccine Act or the Act). All citations in this decision to individual sections of the Vaccine Act are to 42 U.S.C.A. § 300aa. 3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment is expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice renouncing the right to seek review.

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