Knowles v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
16-365
| Fed. Cl. | Mar 2, 2017Background
- Petitioner Stephen Knowles filed a Vaccine Act petition alleging Guillain–Barré Syndrome after a September 17, 2015 influenza vaccination.
- The parties stipulated to compensation and Chief Special Master Dorsey issued a decision awarding damages on September 26, 2016.
- Petitioner moved for attorneys’ fees and costs on October 25, 2016, requesting $26,541.65 in fees and $415.73 in costs (total $26,957.38).
- Petitioner affirmed no out-of-pocket expenses. Respondent filed a response stating she need not participate in fee resolution but conceded statutory requirements were met and suggested a reasonable range of $18,000–$24,000 without explanation.
- The Special Master reviewed billing records, found the request reasonable, and awarded the full requested amount as a lump sum payable jointly to petitioner and counsel.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Entitlement to attorneys’ fees and costs under the Vaccine Act | Knowles sought reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs incurred prosecuting a successful petition | Respondent did not contest entitlement; noted she plays no formal role but agreed statutory requirements were met | Award granted: petitioner entitled to reasonable fees and costs under §300aa‑15(e) |
| Appropriate amount of fees and costs | Requested $26,957.38 based on submitted billing records | Suggested a reasonable range of $18,000–$24,000 without supporting detail | Special Master reviewed records, found request reasonable, and awarded full $26,957.38 |
| Role of respondent in fee proceedings | Not applicable beyond consenting to statutory entitlement | Argued Vaccine Act/Rule do not contemplate respondent’s role in fee resolution but nonetheless commented on reasonableness | Court acknowledged respondent’s limited role but considered her position; decision based on Special Master’s own review |
| Form of award and restrictions on additional charges | Asked for lump-sum payment to petitioner and counsel | No contrary position on form; respondent did not object | Award entered as lump sum payable jointly to petitioner and counsel; attorney barred from collecting additional fees by statute |
Key Cases Cited
- Beck v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 924 F.2d 1029 (Fed. Cir. 1991) (attorney may not collect fees in addition to an award under the Vaccine Act)