United States Court of Federal Claims, 2025

Farrell v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Decided December 15, 2025 · Brian H. Corcoran

Opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 24-0731V

ANTHONY FARRELL,

Chief Special Master Corcoran Petitioner, Filed: November 12, 2025 v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent.

John Beaulieu, Siri & Glimstad, LLP, Louisville, KY, for Petitioner.

James Connor Daughton, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

DECISION ON ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS 1 On May 9, 2024, Anthony Farrell 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 alleged that he suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration following an influenza vaccination he received on November 4, 2023. Petition, ECF No. 1. On March 18, 2025, I issued a decision awarding compensation to Petitioner based on the Respondent’s proffer. ECF No. 34.

Petitioner then filed an Interim Motion for attorney’s fees and costs, requesting an award of $20,660.11 (representing $19,589.00 in fees plus $1,071.11 in costs incurred by Petitioner’s former counsel, Andrew Donald Downing, Esq.). See Interim Motion filed December 17, 2024, at ECF No. 20. Additionally, Petitioner filed a Final Motion for attorney’s fees and costs, requesting an award of $5,254.40 in fees and costs incurred by Petitioner’s counsel of record, John Beaulieu, Esq. See Final Motion, filed May 16, 2025, at ECF No. 40. Furthermore, Petitioner filed a signed statement representing that Petitioner incurred no personal out-of-pocket expenses. ECF No. 40-3.

Respondent reacted to the interim and final motions, reporting in both of his responses that he is satisfied the statutory requirements for an award of attorneys’ fees and costs are met in this case but deferring resolution of the amount to be awarded to my discretion. Motions at 2-5, ECF Nos. 22 and 42. Petitioner filed no reply thereafter.

I have reviewed the billing records submitted with Petitioner’s request. The hourly rates requested by former and current counsel and their paralegals are reasonable and consistent with our prior determinations and shall be awarded herein. And all time billed to the matter was reasonably incurred. I find no cause to reduce the requested hours or rates. Furthermore, Petitioner has provided supporting documentation for all claimed costs. ECF No. 20 at 33-61. Respondent offered no specific objection to the rates or amounts sought. I find the requested costs reasonable and hereby award them in full.

CONCLUSION The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorney’s fees and costs for successful claimants. Section 15(e). Accordingly, I hereby GRANT Petitioner’s Motion for attorney’s fees and costs. Petitioner is awarded attorney’s fees and costs in the total amount of $25,914.51 3 as follows:

• A lump sum of $5,254.40, representing reimbursement for attorney’s fees and costs, to be paid through an ACH deposit to Petitioner’s counsel of record: John Beaulieu’s IOLTA account for prompt disbursement; and

• A lump sum of $20,660.11, representing reimbursement for attorney’s fees and costs to be paid through an ACH deposit to Petitioner’s former counsel: Andrew Donald Downing’s IOLTA account for prompt disbursement.

In the absence of a timely-filed motion for review (see Appendix B to the Rules of the Court), the Clerk of Court shall enter judgment in accordance with this decision. 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Brian H. Corcoran Brian H. Corcoran Chief Special Master

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 inf ormation, 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 f rom 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 ref erences to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2018). 3 This amount is intended to cover all legal expenses incurred in this matter. This award encompasses all charges by the attorney against a client, “advanced costs” as well as f ees f or legal services rendered. Furthermore, § 15(e)(3) prevents an attorney from charging or collecting fees (including costs) that would be in addition to the amount awarded herein. See generally Beck v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 924 F.2d 1029 (Fed. Cir. 1991). 4 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by f iling a joint notice renouncing their right to seek review.

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