Hein v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
19-1943
| Fed. Cl. | Oct 14, 2021Background:
- Petitioner Jessica J. Hein received a Tdap vaccine on July 3, 2018 and alleged a right-shoulder SIRVA.
- Respondent conceded entitlement; the only dispute was the amount of damages.
- Medical course: acute severe pain initially, MRI showing low‑grade partial‑thickness supraspinatus tear, moderate tendinosis/bursitis; three injections and two short PT courses; symptoms spanned ~27 months with fluctuating pain.
- Petitioner was seven months pregnant at vaccination and had newborn/toddler care that affected treatment gaps.
- Petitioner sought $95,000 for past pain and suffering and $1,263.28 in unreimbursed medical expenses; Respondent proposed $75,000 for pain and suffering but agreed to the medical expenses.
- Chief Special Master Corcoran awarded $93,000 for past pain and suffering and $1,263.28 for medical expenses (total $94,263.28); no award for future pain and suffering.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Appropriate amount for past pain & suffering | $95,000 based on severity, duration, pregnancy, comparison to Accetta | $75,000 relying on lower awards in Kim, George, Gentile | Awarded $93,000; compared facts to prior SPU decisions, found Accetta most analogous and distinguished lower awards |
| Recovery of unreimbursed medical expenses | $1,263.28 requested | Agrees | Awarded $1,263.28 |
| Whether future pain & suffering should be awarded | Petitioner did not seek future component | Respondent argued none warranted | No future award; record did not show permanent disability or extenuating circumstances justifying future component |
| Use of prior SPU SIRVA awards as guidance | Relied on Accetta and other SPU decisions to support larger award | Cited Kim/George/Gentile to support lower award | Court considered SPU aggregate data and reasoned decisions (per Graves and Hodges) and applied case‑specific comparison; used prior awards as guidance but relied on record specifics |
Key Cases Cited
- Graves v. Secretary of Health & Human Services, 109 Fed. Cl. 579 (2013) (rejecting a rigid continuum tied to the statutory cap; directing case‑specific analysis using record and precedent)
- Hodges v. Secretary of Health & Human Services, 9 F.3d 958 (Fed. Cir. 1993) (special masters may rely on accumulated expertise in vaccine cases)
- Doe 34 v. Secretary of Health & Human Services, 87 Fed. Cl. 758 (2009) (prior awards may be used as an aid in determining appropriate damages)
- Youngblood v. Secretary of Health & Human Services, 32 F.3d 552 (Fed. Cir. 1994) (net present value principles for projected awards discussed)