Haynes v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS Filed: September 30, 2024 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * MARK A. HAYNES, * UNPUBLISHED * Petitioner, * No. 19-1563V * v. * Special Master Dorsey * SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Decision Based on Stipulation; AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Influenza (“Flu”) Vaccine; Chronic * Inflammatory Demyelinating * Polyneuropathy (“CIDP”). * Respondent. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Nathan Williams, Bahe Cook Cantley & Nefzger, Louisville, KY, for Petitioner.

Madelyn Weeks, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

DECISION BASED ON STIPULATION 1 On October 8, 2019, Mark A. Haynes (“Petitioner”) filed a petition in the National Vaccine Injury Program. 2 Petition (ECF No. 1). On March 9, 2020, Petitioner filed an amended petition alleging that as a result of receiving an influenza (“flu”) vaccine on November 20, 2018, he suffered chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (“CIDP”). Amended Petition at Preamble (ECF No. 19).

Because this Decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the undersigned is required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims’ website and/or at https://www.govinfo.gov/app/collection/uscourts/national/cofc in accordance with the E- Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2018) (Federal Management and Promotion of Electronic Government Services). This means the Decision will be available to anyone with access to the Internet. In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), Petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to redact medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from public access.

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, U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10 to -34 (2018) (“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.

On September 30, 2024, the parties filed a stipulation recommending an award of compensation to Petitioner. Stipulation (ECF No. 124). Respondent denies that the flu vaccine caused Petitioner to suffer from CIDP or any other injury or his current condition. Nevertheless, the parties agree to the joint stipulation, attached hereto as Appendix A. The undersigned finds the stipulation reasonable and adopts it as the decision of the Court in awarding damages, on the terms set forth therein.

The parties stipulate that Petitioner shall receive the following compensation: a. A lump sum of $256,996.40, which amount represents compensation for first year life care expenses ($6,996.40) and combined lost earnings and pain and suffering ($250,000.00), in the form of a check payable to Petitioner.

b. A lump sum of $103,239.52, representing reimbursement of a Medicaid lien for services rendered to petitioner by the State of Kentucky, in the form of a check payable jointly to Petitioner and Elevance Attn: Greg Gant, File #I 16729947 Amount: $103,239.52 Subrogation Department P.O. Box 659940 San Antonio, TX 78265-9939 Petitioner agrees to endorse this check to Elevance.

c. An amount sufficient to purchase the annuity contract described in paragraph 10 [of the Stipulation], paid to the life insurance company from which the annuity will be purchased.

Stipulation at ¶ 8. These amounts represent compensation for all damages that would be available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a).

The undersigned approves the requested amount for Petitioner’s compensation.

Accordingly, an award should be made consistent with the stipulation.

In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the Clerk of Court SHALL ENTER JUDGMENT in accordance with the terms of the parties’ stipulation. 3 IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Nora B. Dorsey Nora B. Dorsey Special Master

Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment is expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice renouncing the right to seek review.