Davis v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
15-159
| Fed. Cl. | Mar 6, 2017Background
- Petitioners Hailey and Chad Davis filed a Vaccine Act petition on behalf of their son R.D., alleging mitochondrial injury from multiple 2012 vaccinations; R.D. also has autism.
- Petition was dismissed after petitioners filed a Motion to Dismiss; case concluded with no compensation.
- Petitioners sought $32,361.50 in attorneys’ fees and $618.85 in costs; requested fees included work by GW Vaccine Injury Clinic attorneys and law students.
- Respondent suggested a reasonable fee range of $13,000–$15,000 but deferred to the Special Master’s discretion.
- The Special Master found the petition brought in good faith and with reasonable basis through the April 19, 2016 Rule 5 conference, but reduced fee award for excessive, vague, administrative, paralegal, block-billed, and duplicative entries.
- Final award: $25,889.20 in attorneys’ fees plus $12.30 in counsel costs (paid jointly to petitioners and counsel), and $606.55 reimbursed directly to petitioners for out-of-pocket costs.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether petitioners are entitled to attorneys’ fees and costs despite dismissal | Fees and costs requested ($32,980.35) for attorney and student work; seek full reimbursement | Respondent proposed lower reasonable range ($13,000–$15,000); deferred to Special Master | Petition brought in good faith and had reasonable basis through Rule 5; fees awarded but reduced for billing problems |
| Proper hourly rates for GW Clinic attorneys and students | Requested rates consistent with GW Clinic precedent | No dispute as to rates; respondent focused on total amount | Court awarded rates per Miller decision: partners $400–$415; students $145 (as requested) |
| Whether billed tasks are compensable (administrative/paralegal) | Petitioners billed many entries at attorney rates, including admin and paralegal tasks | Respondent argued for significant reduction (generally) | Administrative and paralegal tasks are not compensable at attorney rates; court disallowed/reclassified such hours and reduced fees accordingly |
| Whether reductions were warranted for vague, block-billed, excessive, and duplicative entries | Petitioners sought full-time entries often covering multiple tasks and multiple reviewers | Respondent cited prior dismissed autism cases and urged lower award | Special Master reduced hours: found numerous vague entries, block billing, excessive drafting/review time, and substantial duplicative intraoffice billing; applied a 20% reduction to attorneys’ and students’ fees |
Key Cases Cited
- Saxton v. Secretary of Health & Human Servs., 3 F.3d 1517 (Fed. Cir. 1993) (special masters may use experience to reduce unreasonable rates/hours)
- Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424 (U.S. 1983) (hours that are excessive, redundant, or unnecessary must be excluded)
- Rochester v. United States, 18 Cl. Ct. 379 (Cl. Ct. 1989) (clerical/secretarial work is non-compensable overhead)
- Bell v. Secretary of Health & Human Servs., 18 Cl. Ct. 751 (Cl. Ct. 1989) (fee applications must sufficiently detail time billed)
- Sabella v. Secretary of Health & Human Servs., 86 Fed. Cl. 201 (Fed. Cl. 2009) (affirming reductions for overstaffing and duplicative billing)