Davis v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
15-693
| Fed. Cl. | Jul 25, 2017Background
- Petitioner Lisa Davis filed a Vaccine Program petition alleging GBS and/or CIDP following a 2014 influenza vaccination and received compensation pursuant to a stipulation, with decision entered April 20, 2017.
- After entitlement was resolved in her favor, Davis requested attorneys’ fees and costs totaling $47,016.27 under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(e).
- Requested fees: $35,414.50 (attorney Lawrence Cohan at $400/hr; associate David Carney at $275–$290/hr; paralegal $135/hr).
- Requested costs: $11,601.77 (including $8,500 in expert fees and ~$2,498 for medical records).
- Respondent did not object substantively and asked the special master to exercise discretion to determine a reasonable award.
- Special Master Roth reviewed rates, hours, and costs, found them reasonable, and awarded the full requested amount to be paid jointly to petitioner and counsel.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Eligibility for fee award though compensation was by stipulation | Davis requested fees under §15(e) because she ultimately prevailed | Respondent did not oppose and conceded requirements were met | Award allowed: prevailing status and/or good-faith filings support fee award under §15(e) |
| Reasonableness of hourly rates | Requested rates (Cohan $400; Carney $275–$290; paralegal $135) are consistent with prior special-master decisions | No objection to requested rates | Rates found reasonable and granted based on counsel experience and recent precedent |
| Reasonableness of hours billed | Counsel’s billed hours were reasonable and not duplicative or erroneous | Respondent raised no specific objections | Hours accepted in full; no reductions imposed |
| Reasonableness of litigation costs (experts, records) | $11,601.77 reasonable given expert and records needs | No substantive objection | Costs accepted in full; expert and records fees deemed appropriate |
Key Cases Cited
- Sebelius v. Cloer, 133 S. Ct. 1886 (Sup. Ct.) (fee award principles when petition succeeds)
- Avera v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 515 F.3d 1343 (Fed. Cir.) (lodestar approach endorsed)
- Blum v. Stenson, 465 U.S. 886 (U.S.) (hourly-rate lodestar formulation)
- Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424 (U.S.) (limits on recoverable hours; no excessive or redundant billing)
- Saxton v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 3 F.3d 1517 (Fed. Cir.) (special master discretion in reducing hours)
- Broekelschen v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 102 Fed. Cl. 719 (Fed. Cl.) (no need for line-by-line reductions)
- Sabella v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 86 Fed. Cl. 201 (Fed. Cl.) (special masters may adjust fees sua sponte)
- Beck v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 924 F.2d 1029 (Fed. Cir.) (award covers all legal charges; counsel cannot collect additional fees)