Alvarado v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
15-2
| Fed. Cl. | Sep 13, 2017Background
- Petitioner Juan Alvarado filed a Vaccine Program petition alleging SIRVA from a 2012 influenza vaccine and later accepted a joint stipulation awarding compensation.
- Parties negotiated settlement but encountered an impasse because petitioner receives means-tested benefits (Medicaid, SSI, food stamps).
- Special Master suggested exploring a special needs trust; counsel found a pooled special needs trust feasible and the parties settled.
- Petitioner moved for attorneys’ fees and costs totaling $36,873.71 and also sought $3,689.95 in personal costs, including $1,250 to enroll in a pooled special needs trust and $2,000 estimated future trust-maintenance fees.
- Respondent agreed statutory requirements for fees were met and left the amount to the Special Master’s discretion. The Special Master granted attorneys’ fees and most costs but denied reimbursement for special needs trust establishment and maintenance costs.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether attorneys' fees and ordinary litigation costs are recoverable under the Vaccine Act | Alvarado sought $29,742.70 in attorneys' fees and $7,131.01 in attorneys' costs; argued these were incurred in the proceeding | Respondent agreed statutory requirements were met and deferred to Special Master to determine a reasonable award | Granted in full: $36,873.71 awarded for attorneys' fees and costs payable jointly to petitioner and counsel |
| Whether petitioner’s out-of-pocket costs (filing fee, postage, etc.) are recoverable | Petitioner sought $3,689.95 in personal costs and provided required statements | Respondent did not oppose recovery of ordinary petitioner costs | Partially granted: $439.95 awarded to petitioner for certain filing/postage/fax costs |
| Whether costs to establish a pooled special needs trust are recoverable under the Vaccine Act | Alvarado requested $1,250 enrollment fee and $2,000 estimated future trust-maintenance fees to preserve Medicaid eligibility | Respondent opposed awarding trust costs as not incurred in the Vaccine Act proceeding and not required by the stipulation | Denied: special needs trust setup/maintenance costs are not "incurred in any proceeding upon a petition" and are not authorized under the Act |
| Whether a settlement-related suggestion or facilitation (trust use) transforms trust costs into recoverable litigation costs | Petitioner argued the trust facilitated settlement and thus was connected to the proceeding | Respondent argued facilitation alone does not make post-proceeding costs compensable absent statutory authorization or a stipulation/requirement | Held: facilitation does not suffice; because the trust was not required by the proceeding or stipulation, its costs are nonrecoverable |
Key Cases Cited
- Perreira v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 27 Fed. Cl. 29 (1992) (special masters have wide discretion in determining reasonable fees)
- Saxton ex rel. Saxton v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 3 F.3d 1517 (Fed. Cir. 1993) (special masters may rely on prior experience reviewing fee applications)
- Beck v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 924 F.2d 1029 (Fed. Cir. 1991) (attorney fee award under Vaccine Act is intended to cover all legal expenses and prohibits additional charging)