Barnette v. Secretary, Department of Health & Human Services
110 Fed. Cl. 34
Fed. Cl.2013Background
- Claire Barnette, born March 18, 2005, had normal early development until Sept. 19, 2005 when she received multiple vaccines and had a seizure that night.
- Her seizures persisted; by Oct. 2005 she was diagnosed with a seizure disorder and underwent neurology follow-up with EEG/MRI planning.
- Genetic testing in 2008 revealed a de novo SCN1A mutation, later linked to Severe Myoclonic Epilepsy of Infancy (Dravet Syndrome).
- Claire’s condition progressed to intractable epilepsy; a vagus nerve stimulator was implanted in June 2008; development remained delayed.
- Petitioners filed suit under the Vaccine Act on Dec. 21, 2006 seeking compensation; the special master denied on Sept. 26, 2012; petitioners sought review.
- The court, after argument, denied petitioners’ motion for review and affirmed the special master’s decision.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the vaccination a substantial factor in significant aggravation? | Barnette asserts vaccination significantly aggravated Claire's condition. | Barnette argues vaccination caused a measurable aggravation under the standard for off-Table injuries. | No; vaccination did not significantly aggravate. |
| Did the onset of Claire's disease occur significantly earlier due to vaccination? | Wheless/testimony supported earlier onset; Kendall argued earlier onset occurred. | Special master found onset not significantly earlier; timing within typical range. | No; onset not significantly earlier. |
| Did petitioners prove worsening of Claire's condition due to vaccination? | Evidence showed range of outcomes; mutation could yield severe phenotype; vaccination could worsen. | Respondent's experts provided credible, persuasive interpretation of evidence; no worsening proven. | No; no proof of worsening attributable to vaccination. |
Key Cases Cited
- Whitecotton v. Sec’y of Dep’t of Health & Human Servs., 81 F.3d 1099 (Fed. Cir. 1996) (four-part test for significant aggravation of Table injuries; pre/post-vaccine condition)
- Althen v. Sec’y of Dep’t of Health & Human Servs., 418 F.3d 1274 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (standard for proving off-Table causation: medical theory, sequence, temporal relationship)
- de Bazan v. Sec’y of Dep’t of Health & Human Servs., 539 F.3d 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (causation in fact: vaccine as substantial factor)
- Shyface v. Sec’y of Dep’t of Health & Human Servs., 165 F.3d 1344 (Fed. Cir. 1999) (causation in fact standard; no certainty required, but logical sequence)
- Moberly ex rel. Moberly v. Sec’y of Dep’t of Health & Human Servs., 592 F.3d 1315 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (court may weigh reliability of expert testimony; not solely epidemiology)
- Loving ex rel. Loving v. Sec’y of Dep't of Health & Human Servs., 86 Fed.Cl. 135 (Fed.Cl. 2009) (framework blending Whitecotton off-Table and Althen-like proof for significant aggravation)