Simmons v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
11-216
| Fed. Cl. | Oct 24, 2016Background
- Petitioner filed a Vaccine Act petition alleging Tdap vaccine (2008) caused anaphylaxis, immune dysregulation, and autoimmune disease leading to Addison’s disease; entitlement was awarded after a two-day hearing and a ruling on October 30, 2015.
- Petitioner sought interim attorneys’ fees and costs in multiple submissions between Dec. 2015 and June 2016, ultimately requesting $188,355.45 for work and expenses incurred through June 5, 2016.
- Respondent agreed statutory prerequisites for an award were met but disputed the amount, estimating a reasonable interim award between $145,000 and $149,750 and raising specific objections.
- Petitioner sought (1) retroactive application of 2016 hourly rates to prior years (a "net present value" argument) and (2) reimbursement for a life-care planner and other costs.
- The special master reviewed billing records, concluded the hours were generally reasonable, rejected the retroactive-rate/net-present-value argument based on binding Federal Circuit precedent, allowed the life-care planner expense, and reduced the requested fees accordingly.
- The special master awarded $185,077.20 in interim attorneys’ fees and costs (payable jointly to petitioner and counsel) and $5,462.65 to petitioner for personal costs.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether petitioner may apply counsel’s 2016 hourly rates retroactively to past years (net present value of fee elements) | Apply current (2016) rates to prior-year work under §300aa-15(f)(4)(A) as a "net present value" adjustment | Retroactive rates would function as prejudgment interest on past expenses and are barred; award should reflect contemporaneous rates | Denied; retroactive/current rates for past work are barred by no‑interest rule; award uses contemporaneous rates (Biery/Chiu controlling) |
| Whether life-care planner fee ($5,000) is recoverable as interim cost | Advance payment requested; later billed for services performed | Objected as advanced payment for services not yet rendered | Allowed — planner billed for services; full $5,000 awarded |
| Reasonableness of hours and overall interim fee amount | Billing records show reasonable hours; requested totals adjusted only for proper rates | Proposed lower range ($145k–$149.75k) based on program experience | Special master found hours reasonable and awarded most fees after correcting rate issue; overall award $185,077.20 |
| Whether respondent’s case-comparison estimate should determine award | N/A (petitioner did not rely on it) | Respondent urged use of her estimate from similar cases | Rejected — special master emphasized case-by-case assessment; respondent’s range not dispositive |
Key Cases Cited
- Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424 (fee reductions for excessive or unnecessary hours)
- Saxton v. Secretary of HHS, 3 F.3d 1517 (special master discretion to reduce hours)
- Savin v. Secretary of HHS, 85 Fed. Cl. 313 (requirements for contemporaneous billing records)
- Chiu v. United States, 948 F.2d 711 (no award of current rates for past work; interest barred)
- Biery v. United States, 818 F.3d 704 (affirming that awarding current rates for past work is barred by no‑interest rule)
- Shaw v. Library of Congress, 478 U.S. 310 (no-interest rule/sovereign immunity context)
- Perreira v. Secretary of HHS, 27 Fed. Cl. 29 (reasonableness requirement applies to attorneys' costs as well)