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


Menu:
  •     In the United States Court of Federal Claims
    OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
    Originally Filed: December 8, 2016
    Refiled in Redacted Form: January 23, 2017
    * * * * * * * * * * * * *  *
    M.M.,                      *
    *                    No. 15-807v
    Petitioner,       *                    Special Master
    *                    Hamilton-Fieldman
    v.                         *
    *
    SECRETARY OF HEALTH        *                    Attorneys’ Fees and Costs;
    AND HUMAN SERVICES,        *                    Reasonable Amount Requested.
    *
    Respondent.       *
    * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
    Carol L.Gallagher, Carol L. Gallagher, Esquire, LLC, Linwood, NJ, for Petitioner.
    Darryl R. Wishard, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    DECISION1
    On July 29, 2015, M.M. (“Petitioner”) petitioned for compensation under the
    National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to -34 (2012).
    Petitioner alleged that the administration of the Influenza (“Flu”) vaccine on September
    18, 2013 caused her to develop Guillain-Barré Syndrome (“GBS”). Petition at Preamble,
    filed July 29, 2015. On October 14, 2016, the undersigned issued a decision awarding
    compensation to Petitioner pursuant to the parties’ joint stipulation.
    1
    When this decision was originally filed the undersigned advised her intent 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 (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion
    of Electronic Government Services). In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), Petitioner
    filed a timely motion to redact certain information. This decision is being reissued with
    the redaction of Petitioner’s name. Except for those changes and this footnote, no other
    substantive changes have been made. This decision will be posted on the court’s website
    with no further opportunity to move for redaction.
    On November 17, 2016, Petitioner filed an application for attorneys’ fees and costs.
    Petitioner requested compensation in the amount of $90,738.38 for attorneys’ fees and
    costs, and costs personally incurred by Petitioner in the amount of $1,196.00. Petitioner’s
    Application at 3, filed Nov. 17, 2016. Respondent filed a response to Petitioner’s request
    on November 18, 2016, stating that based on a survey of fee awards in similar cases and in
    her experience litigating Vaccine Act claims, a reasonable amount for fees and costs in this
    case would fall between $63,000.00 and $70,000.00. Response at 3, filed Nov. 18, 2016.
    Petitioner filed a reply on November 29, 2016, arguing that her number of billable hours is
    not excessive and her hourly rate is reasonable; therefore, an award of $75,549.75 in
    attorney fees and $15,384.63 in costs is reasonable. Reply at 1-4. The undersigned agrees.
    Attorneys’ fees and costs are specific to each case and cannot be generalized as Respondent
    argues. Respondent provided no basis or explanation for how she arrived at her proposed
    range for this specific case. In addition, the hourly rate sought by Petitioner’s counsel
    appears to be consistent with that awarded recently by other special masters in the program.
    See Bord v. Sec’y of HHS, 14-1009 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Dec. 5, 2016).
    In accordance with the Vaccine Act, 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(e) (2012), the
    undersigned has reviewed the billing records and expert costs in this case and finds that
    Petitioner’s request for fees and costs is reasonable. Accordingly, the undersigned
    hereby awards the amount of $90,738.38, in the form of a check made payable jointly
    to Petitioner and Petitioner’s counsel, Carol L. Gallagher, of Carol L. Gallagher,
    Esquire, LLC for attorneys’ fees and costs; and awards the amount of $1,196.00, in
    the form of a check payable to Petitioner only. In the absence of a motion for review
    filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the clerk of the court shall enter judgment in
    accordance herewith.2
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
    /s/Lisa D. Hamilton-Fieldman
    Lisa D. Hamilton-Fieldman
    Special Master
    2
    Entry of judgment can be expedited by each party’s filing of a notice renouncing the
    right to seek review. Vaccine Rule 11(a).
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 15-807

Judges: Lisa Hamilton-Fieldman

Filed Date: 1/23/2017

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 1/24/2017