United States Court of Federal Claims, 2015

Sutton v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Decided February 13, 2015 · Laura D Millman

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 14-522V

Filed: January 22, 2015

Not for Publication *************************************

AL LESEAN SUTTON, * *

Petitioner, * * Damages decision based on proffer; v. * influenza (flu) vaccine; brachial * neuritis SECRETARY OF HEALTH *

AND HUMAN SERVICES, * *

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

Jean S. Martin, Wilmington, NC, for petitioner.

Michael P. Milmoe, Washington, DC, for respondent.

MILLMAN, Special Master

DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES 1

On June 20, 2014, petitioner filed a petition under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10–34 (2006), alleging that he suffered a shoulder injury as a result of the influenza (“flu”) vaccination he received on October 27, 2011. On November 5, 2014, respondent orally conceded that petitioner suffered brachial neuritis and was entitled to compensation.

On January 22, 2015, respondent filed Respondent’s Proffer on Award of Compensation. The undersigned finds the terms of the proffer to be reasonable. Based on the record as a whole, the undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to the award as stated in the proffer. Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached proffer, the court awards a lump sum payment of $100,000.00, representing all elements of compensation to which petitioner would be entitled under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). The award shall be in the form of a check for $100,000.00 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: February 13, 2015 /s/ Laura D. Millman Laura D. Millman Special Master

1 Because this decision contains a reasoned explanation for the special master's action in this case, the special master intends to post this 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 redact 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 redact 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.