United States Court of Federal Claims, 2024

Wiltz v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Decided March 4, 2024 · Katherine E. Oler

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 22-89V Filed: February 6, 2024

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

* JOLENE WILTZ, *

* *

Petitioner, *

* v. *

* *

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND * HUMAN SERVICES, *

* *

Respondent. *

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

Glen Sturtevant, Jr., Rawls Law Group, Richmond, VA, for Petitioner Meghan Murphy, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent

DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1

On January 31, 2022, Jolene Wiltz (“Petitioner”) filed a petition seeking compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (“the Vaccine Program”).2 Pet., ECF No. 1. Petitioner alleges she suffered from Guillain-Barré syndrome as a result of the tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccination she received on March 9, 2021. See Stipulation ¶ 2, 4, dated February 6, 2024 (ECF No. 32); see also Petition.

Respondent denies “that the vaccine caused petitioner’s alleged GBS, or any other injury, and denies that her current condition is a sequela of a vaccine-related injury.” See Stipulation ¶ 6. Nonetheless, both parties, while maintaining their above-stated positions, agreed in a stipulation filed February 6, 2024 that the issues before them can be settled and that a decision should be entered awarding Petitioner compensation.

I have reviewed the file, and based upon that review, I conclude that the parties’ stipulation is reasonable. I therefore adopt it as my decision in awarding damages on the terms set forth therein.

The stipulation awards: a lump sum of $136,000.00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner.

Stipulation ¶ 8. This award represents compensation for all damages that would be available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a).

I approve a Vaccine Program award in the requested amount set forth above to be made 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.3

IT IS SO ORDERED. s/ Katherine E. Oler Katherine E. Oler Special Master

1 Because this Decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, it must be made publicly accessible and will be posted 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, I agree that the identified material fits within this definition, I will redact such material from public access. 2 The Vaccine Program comprises Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755 (codified as amended at 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10–34 (2012)) (hereinafter “Vaccine Act” or “the Act”). All subsequent references to sections of the Vaccine Act shall be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa. 3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by jointly filing notice renouncing their right to seek review.

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