United States Court of Federal Claims, 2025

Benedick v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Decided May 29, 2025 · Brian H. Corcoran

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 23-384V

CHARLENE BENEDICK, Chief Special Master Corcoran

Petitioner, Filed: April 29, 2025 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent.

Richard Gage, Richard Gage, P.C. (WY), Cheyenne, WY, for Petitioner.

Mark Kim Hellie, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES 1

On March 20, 2023, Charlene Benedick filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq. 2 (the “Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that she suffered from a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) as a result of a tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccination administered to her on August 24, 2020. Pet., ECF No. 1. Petitioner further alleges that the vaccine was received in the United States, she suffered sequela of her injury for more than six months, and neither Petitioner nor any other party has ever received compensation in the form of an award or settlement for her vaccine-related injury. Id. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On August 6, 2024, a Ruling on Entitlement was issued, finding Petitioner entitled to compensation for her SIRVA. ECF No. 29. On April 28, 2025, Respondent filed a Proffer on award of compensation (“Proffer”) indicating Petitioner should be awarded $58,000.00 in pain and suffering and $503.04 in past unreimbursable expenses. Proffer at 2, ECF No. 41. In the Proffer, Respondent represented that Petitioner agrees with the proffered award. See id. Based on the record as a whole, I find that Petitioner is entitled to an award as stated in the Proffer.

Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Proffer, I award Petitioner a lump sum payment of $58,503.04 for pain and suffering and past unreimbursable expenses to be paid through an ACH deposit to Petitioner’s counsel’s IOLTA account for prompt disbursement to Petitioner. This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available under Section 15(a).

The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this Decision. 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Brian H. Corcoran Brian H. Corcoran Chief Special Master

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

CHARLENE BENEDICK,

Petitioner,

Case No. 23-384V (ECF) v. CHIEF SPECIAL MASTER

CORCORAN SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent.

RESPONDENT’S PROFFER ON AWARD OF COMPENSATION I. Procedural History

On March 20, 2023, Charlene Benedick (“petitioner”) filed a petition for compensation under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to -34 (“Vaccine Act” or “Act”), alleging that she suffered a left shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) as the result of a tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccination received on August 24, 2020. Pet. at 1.

On August 5, 2024, respondent filed his Rule 4(c) Report, conceding entitlement in this case because petitioner met the criteria to establish a presumptive Table SIRVA injury. ECF Doc. No. 27 at 1-2, 4-6. On August 6, 2024, the Court issued its Ruling on Entitlement, finding that petitioner was entitled to compensation. ECF Doc. No. 29. II. Items of Compensation

Based upon the evidence of record, respondent proffers that petitioner should be awarded $58,503.04. The award is comprised of the following: $58,000.00 for pain and suffering and $503.04 for unreimbursed out-of-pocket medical expenses. This amount represents all elements of compensation to which petitioner would be entitled under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a) regarding her August 24, 2020 Tdap vaccination. Petitioner agrees.1 III. Form of the Award

The parties recommend that compensation provided to petitioner should be made through a lump sum payment of $58,503.04, to be paid through an ACH deposit to petitioner’s counsel’s IOLTA account for prompt disbursement to petitioner. Petitioner agrees.

Petitioner is a competent adult. Evidence of guardianship is not required in this case.

Respectfully submitted, YAAKOV M. ROTH Acting Assistant Attorney General C. SALVATORE D’ALESSIO Director Torts Branch, Civil Division HEATHER L. PEARLMAN Deputy Director Torts Branch, Civil Division VORIS E. JOHNSON, JR. Assistant Director Torts Branch, Civil Division s/ Mark K. Hellie MARK K. HELLIE Trial Attorney Torts Branch, Civil Division U.S. Department of Justice P.O. Box 146, Benjamin Franklin Station Washington, D.C. 20044-0146 T: (202) 616-4208 E: [email protected]

DATED: April 28, 2025

1 Because this Decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action taken 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 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for ease of citation, all section references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2018). 3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice renouncing the right to seek review. 1 Should petitioner die prior to entry of judgment, the parties reserve the right to move the Court for appropriate relief. In particular, respondent would oppose any award for future medical expenses, future lost earnings, and future pain and suffering.

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