Mann v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
15-813
| Fed. Cl. | Dec 8, 2017Background
- Petitioner Jean Mann filed a Vaccine Act petition alleging left shoulder brachial neuritis caused by a Tdap vaccine administered August 15, 2012.
- The parties filed a joint stipulation and Chief Special Master Dorsey awarded compensation on December 20, 2016.
- On December 28, 2016 petitioner moved for attorneys’ fees and costs totaling $37,620.54 (fees $36,242.20; costs $1,378.34); petitioner reported no out-of-pocket expenses.
- Respondent declined to contest the fee request on its merits, stating the statutory requirements for an award were satisfied but leaving reasonableness to the Chief Special Master.
- The Chief Special Master relied on prior reasoned rates established in Moritz v. Sec’y of HHS for counsel and paralegal rates (Mr. Krakow: $413/hr for 2015, $425/hr for 2016; paralegal $125/hr) and reviewed the billing records.
- The Special Master found the requested hours and rates reasonable, declined to reduce the award despite some inconsistent billing entries, and awarded the full $37,620.54 as a lump sum jointly payable to petitioner and counsel.
Issues
| Issue | Mann's Argument | Sec'y's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether petitioner is entitled to an award of attorneys’ fees and costs under the Vaccine Act | Requested $37,620.54 as reasonable compensation for fees and costs | Respondent did not contest entitlement and agreed statutory requirements were met; left reasonableness to the Special Master | Award granted in full — statutory requirements satisfied and fees/costs reasonable |
| Whether requested hourly rates and total hours are reasonable | Sought rates consistent with Moritz decision: Krakow $413 (2015)/$425 (2016); paralegal $125; billed hours as submitted | Did not object to the specific rates/hours; deferred to Special Master for reasonableness | Special Master adopted Moritz rates and found no reduction necessary; full fees allowed |
| Whether any billing entries should be reduced for inconsistent attorney vs. paralegal billing | Maintained total billed amount was reasonable | Respondent took no position on specific entries | Special Master warned counsel about inconsistent entries but declined to reduce award in this application |
| Form of payment and scope of award | Requested lump-sum payment covering all legal expenses | No objection | Award ordered as lump sum payable jointly to petitioner and counsel; encompasses all fees and advanced costs per §300aa-15(e)(3) |
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 amount awarded under Vaccine Act)
