In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
No. 16-0189V
Filed: August 14, 2017
UNPUBLISHED
ROSE MCALISTER,
Special Processing Unit (SPU);
Petitioner, Attorneys’ Fees and Costs
v.
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES,
Respondent.
Ronald C. Homer, Conway, Homer, P.C., Boston, MA, for petitioner.
Kathryn A. Robinette, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
DECISION ON ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS 1
Dorsey, Chief Special Master:
On February 8, 2016, Rose McAlister (“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 she sustained a
shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) as a result of receiving the
influenza (“flu”) vaccine on October 16, 2014. On April 28, 2017, the undersigned
issued a decision awarding compensation to petitioner based on the parties’ joint
stipulation. ECF No. 44.
On July 21, 2017, petitioner filed a motion for attorneys’ fees and costs. ECF No.
48. Petitioner requests attorneys’ fees in the amount of $19,033.50 and attorneys’ costs
in the amount of $1,732.48. Id. In compliance with General Order #9, petitioner filed a
1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the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.
2National 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).
signed statement indicating she incurred no out-of-pocket expenses. Thus, the total
amount requested is $20,765.98.
On July 31, 2017, respondent filed a response to petitioner’s motion. ECF No.
50. 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 he “is
satisfied the statutory requirements for an award of attorneys’ fees and costs are met in
this case.” Id. at 2. Respondent “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 or rates.
The Vaccine Act permits an award of reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs.
§ 15(e). Based on the reasonableness of petitioner’s request, the undersigned
GRANTS petitioner’s motion for attorneys’ fees and costs.
Accordingly, the undersigned awards $20,765.98, 3 representing
reimbursement for all attorneys' fees and costs, in the form of a check payable
jointly to petitioner and petitioner’s counsel, Ronald C. Homer.
The clerk of the court shall enter judgment in accordance herewith. 4
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Nora Beth Dorsey
Nora Beth Dorsey
Chief Special Master
3This 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.
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), entry of judgment can be expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice
renouncing the right to seek review.
.
2