Davis v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
14-978
| Fed. Cl. | Feb 17, 2017Background
- Petitioner Harvard Davis filed a Vaccine Act petition alleging Guillain-Barré Syndrome after an influenza vaccination on August 19, 2013.
- The case was litigated beginning October 2014; the parties engaged in extended settlement negotiations (including a life care plan) but could not agree on damages, and respondent later requested an expert report on causation.
- Petitioner filed a motion for interim attorneys’ fees and costs on December 30, 2016, seeking $110,175.88 (including counsel fees, life-care planner fees, and petitioner’s out-of-pocket expenses).
- Respondent did not object to an interim award and deferred to the Special Master on whether the legal standard for interim fees was met.
- The Special Master found interim fees appropriate due to protracted litigation and potential undue hardship, approved counsel’s hourly rates as reasonable, reduced the life-care planner’s travel-time billing to 50% of her hourly rate, and awarded a total of $110,075.88 with specific payee breakdowns.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether interim attorneys’ fees and costs are appropriate | Roquemore sought interim fees because litigation was protracted and costs were significant | Respondent deferred to Special Master but raised no opposition to awardability | Interim fees appropriate given protracted settlement/mediation efforts and impending litigation steps; award granted |
| Reasonableness of counsel’s hourly rates | Requested rates ($355–$400 for Ms. Roquemore; $125–$135 for paralegal) based on experience and prevailing Program ranges | Respondent did not contest the rates | Rates found reasonable and consistent with McCulloch ranges and prior approvals |
| Life-care planner billing for travel time | Petitioner sought full hourly rate for 0.8 hours travel billed by life-care planner | Respondent did not object to overall fees but Special Master reviewed billing detail | Travel time compensated at 50% of hourly rate per Program practice; life-care planner award reduced accordingly |
| Form and allocation of award | Requested lump sums to petitioner, life-care planner, and joint payment to petitioner & counsel | Respondent did not oppose specific allocation | Award entered as requested except adjusted life-care planner amount; totals and payee allocation set forth in decision |
Key Cases Cited
- Avera v. Sec’y of HHS, 515 F.3d 1343 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (interim fees appropriate in protracted cases with costly experts)
- Shaw v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 609 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (interim fee awards may be proper where litigation costs impose undue hardship and claim has good-faith basis)
- Carrington v. Sec’y of HHS, 85 Fed. Cl. 319 (2008) (reasonableness of fee applications is within special master’s discretion)
- Sabella v. Sec’y of HHS, 86 Fed. Cl. 201 (2009) (special masters have discretion to reduce fees sua sponte)