McKenzie v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 15-1280

Petitioner filed a Vaccine Program claim alleging Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) caused by a 9/19/2013 influenza vaccination; petition filed 10/28/2015.
The Chief Special Master issued a decision awarding compensation based on the parties’ joint stipulation on 12/22/2016.
Petitioner then moved for attorneys’ fees and costs on 2/25/2017 seeking $31,516.00 in fees and $1,345.45 in costs (total $32,861.45); petitioner reported no out-of-pocket expenses.
Respondent stated he has no role in resolving fee requests under the Vaccine Act or Vaccine Rule 13 but conceded statutory requirements were met and deferred to the Special Master’s discretion on amount.
The Special Master reviewed billing records, found the requested hours and rates reasonable, and granted the full requested award.
The award of $32,861.45 was ordered to be paid jointly to petitioner and petitioner’s counsel, with the clerk directed to enter judgment.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether petitioner is entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs under the Vaccine Act	Petitioner requested $31,516.00 (fees) and $1,345.45 (costs) and submitted billing records showing reasonableness	Respondent did not contest entitlement; stated he has no role in fee resolution but agreed statutory requirements were met and deferred amount to Special Master	Granted: Special Master found statutory requirements met and billing reasonable; awarded full $32,861.45
Whether billing hours or rates should be reduced	Petitioner supported request with detailed records and compliance with General Order #9	Respondent did not challenge the reasonableness of hours or rates	Denied reduction: Special Master found no cause to reduce hours or rates
Form of payment and scope of award	Petitioner sought reimbursement of all attorneys’ fees and costs incurred	Respondent had no position on form, deferred to Special Master	Awarded lump sum payable jointly to petitioner and counsel; award covers all legal expenses and prevents additional charges
Procedural role of respondent in fee proceedings	Petitioner proceeded under Vaccine Act fee provisions	Respondent argued Vaccine Act and Rule 13 do not provide a role for respondent in fee-resolution but acknowledged entitlement	Special Master exercised discretion; respondent’s concession did not alter review; award entered

Beck v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 924 F.2d 1029 (Fed. Cir. 1991) (attorney fee award in Vaccine Program covers all charges by attorney and prevents additional collection from client)