Barcello v. Secretary of Health and Human Services ( 2017 )


Menu:
  •         In the United States Court of Federal Claims
    OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
    No. 16-0180V
    Filed: April 18, 2017
    UNPUBLISHED
    *********************************
    JOSEPH BARCELLO,                                  *
    *
    Petitioner,              *
    v.                                                *
    *       Attorneys’ Fees and Costs;
    SECRETARY OF HEALTH                               *       Special Processing Unit (“SPU”)
    AND HUMAN SERVICES,                               *
    *
    Respondent.              *
    *
    ****************************
    Bruce W. Slane, Law Office of Bruce W. Slane, P.C., White Plains, NY, for petitioner.
    Jennifer Leigh Reynaud U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
    DECISION ON ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS1
    Dorsey, Chief Special Master:
    On February 5, 2016, Joseph Barcello (“petitioner”) 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 Guillain-
    Barré syndrome (“GBS”) as a result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine he received on
    September 19, 2014. On April 6, 2017, the undersigned issued a decision awarding
    compensation to petitioner based on the parties’ joint stipulation. (ECF No. 46).
    On February 3, 2017, petitioner filed a motion for attorneys’ fees and costs.
    (ECF No. 42). Petitioner requests attorneys’ fees in the amount of $30,421.25, and
    1
    Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the
    undersigned intends to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in accordance with
    the E-Government Act of 2002. 
    44 U.S.C. § 3501
     note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of
    Electronic Government Services). 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.
    2
    National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 
    100 Stat. 3755
    . Hereinafter, for
    ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. §
    300aa (2012).
    attorneys’ costs in the amount of $582.50 for a total amount of $31,003.75. Id. at 1. In
    compliance with General Order #9, petitioner filed a signed statement indicating
    petitioner incurred no out-of-pocket expenses. (ECF No. 42, Tab C).
    On February 8, 2017, respondent filed a response. (ECF No. 43). Respondent
    argues that “[n]either the Vaccine Act nor Vaccine Rule 13 contemplates any role for
    respondent in the resolution of a request by a petitioner for an award of attorneys’ fees
    and costs.” Id. at 1. Respondent adds, however, that she “is satisfied the statutory
    requirements for an award of attorneys’ fees and costs are met in this case.” Id. at 2.
    Petitioner “respectfully recommends that the Chief Special Master exercise her
    discretion and determine a reasonable award for attorneys’ fees and costs.” Id. at 3.
    The undersigned has reviewed the billing records submitted with petitioner’s
    request. In the undersigned’s experience, the request appears reasonable, and the
    undersigned finds no cause to reduce the requested hours, except as follows. It is well
    established that attorneys who bill for performing non-attorney-level work must
    appropriately reduce their hourly rate to reflect that of a legal secretary or paralegal.
    Mostovoy v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 
    2016 WL 720969
    , *5 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr.
    Feb. 4, 2016). After carefully reviewing petitioner's fee application, the undersigned
    finds that associate Ms. AnnMarie Sayad billed her regular attorney rate of $200-$225
    per hour for certain hours spent performing tasks that are most appropriately
    characterized as paralegal/law clerk work. For example, Ms. Sayad billed at an attorney
    rate for tasks such as scanning, e-filing, burning records onto CDs, drafting notices of
    filing, updating exhibit lists and downloading exhibits from CM/ECF. These hours
    should instead be compensated at the paralegal/law clerk rate of $145.00 per hour.
    Petitioner's filing records show that Ms. Sayad billed at least 6.6 hours3 for performing
    paralegal/law clerk tasks. These entries will not be compensated at an attorney rate, but
    at a paralegal/law clerk rate of $145 an hour. Accordingly, the fee award is reduced by
    $457.00.
    The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs.
    § 15(e). Based on the reasonableness of petitioner’s request and the lack of opposition
    from respondent, the undersigned GRANTS petitioner’s motion for attorneys’ fees and
    costs.
    Accordingly, the undersigned awards the total of $30,546.75,4 as a lump
    sum in the form of a check jointly payable to petitioner and petitioner’s counsel
    Bruce Slane, Esq.
    3
    See time entries billed on 12/02/15, 12/14/15, 12/23/15, 8/25/16, 9/14/16, 9/16/16, 9/22/16, 10/17/16,
    10/18/2016, 11/4/2016, 11/11/16, 11/14/16, 11/17/16, 1/26/17.
    4
    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 fees for legal services rendered.
    2
    The clerk of the court shall enter judgment in accordance herewith.5
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
    s/Nora Beth Dorsey
    Nora Beth Dorsey
    Chief Special Master
    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. HHS, 
    924 F.2d 1029
     (Fed. Cir.1991).
    5
    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.
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 16-180

Judges: Nora Beth Dorsey

Filed Date: 12/8/2017

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 12/8/2017