United States Court of Federal Claims, 2015

Packey v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Decided January 9, 2015 · Laura D Millman

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 13-725V

Filed: December 19, 2014

Not for Publication

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

ANNETTE PACKEY, * *

Petitioner, * Damages decision based on stipulation; * influenza (flu) vaccine; acute inflammatory v. * neurological injury *

SECRETARY OF HEALTH *

AND HUMAN SERVICES, * *

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

Danielle A. Strait, Washington, DC, for petitioner.

Lindsay Corliss, Washington, DC, for respondent.

MILLMAN, Special Master

DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1

On December 19, 2014, the parties filed the attached stipulation in which they agreed to settle this case and described the settlement terms. Petitioner alleges that she suffered an acute inflammatory neurological injury that was caused by her October 23, 2012 receipt of influenza (“flu”) vaccine. Respondent denies that the flu vaccine caused petitioner to suffer an acute inflammatory neurological injury or any other injury, and denies that the flu vaccine caused her current condition. Nonetheless, the parties agreed to resolve this matter informally.

The undersigned finds the terms of the stipulation to be reasonable. The court hereby adopts the parties’ said stipulation, attached hereto, and awards compensation in the amount and on the terms set forth therein. Pursuant to the stipulation, the court awards: a. an amount sufficient to purchase the annuity contract described in paragraph 10 of the attached stipulation. This amount shall be paid to the life insurance company from which the annuity will be purchased; and b. a lump sum of $650,000.00, representing compensation for all remaining damages that would be available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). The award shall be in the form of a check for $650,000.00 made payable to petitioner.

In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the clerk of the court is directed to enter judgment herewith.2

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 19, 2014 s/ Laura D. Millman Laura D. Millman Special Master

1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the special master's action in this case, the special master intends to post this unpublished decision on the United States Court of Federal Claims’s website, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (Dec. 17, 2002). Vaccine Rule 18(b) states that all decisions of the special masters will be made available to the public unless they contain trade secrets or commercial or financial information that is privileged and confidential, or medical or similar information whose disclosure would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy. When such a decision is filed, petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to delete such information prior to the document=s disclosure. If the special master, upon review, agrees that the identified material fits within the banned categories listed above, the special master shall delete such material from public access. 2 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by each party, either separately or jointly, filing a notice renouncing the right to seek review.

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