Walsh v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
05-975
| Fed. Cl. | Jun 14, 2017Background
- Petitioners William and Christen Walsh filed a Vaccine Act petition on behalf of their son S.W., alleging a seizure disorder and developmental delay caused or significantly aggravated by a 2002 DTaP vaccination.
- The parties entered a stipulation, and on November 22, 2016 the special master awarded compensation pursuant to that stipulation.
- Petitioners subsequently sought attorneys’ fees of $69,658.00, attorneys’ costs of $16,907.33, and petitioners’ personal costs of $9,743.00 (total $96,308.33).
- Respondent did not contest entitlement to fees and costs and asked the special master to exercise discretion to determine a reasonable award.
- The special master applied the lodestar approach, reviewed contemporaneous billing records, approved the requested hourly rates (consistent with prior awards and the fee schedule), and found the hours and costs reasonable.
- The special master awarded the full requested amounts: $69,658.00 in attorneys’ fees, $16,907.33 in attorneys’ costs (total $86,565.33 payable jointly to petitioners and counsel), and $9,743.00 in petitioners’ costs (payable to petitioners).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Entitlement to attorneys’ fees/costs after a stipulated award | Walsh: Fees and costs recoverable because claim brought in good faith and reasonable basis; parties stipulated to compensation | Respondent: Did not dispute entitlement; deferred to special master's discretion to set a reasonable amount | Granted — fees and costs awarded under 42 U.S.C. §300aa‑15(e) because statutory requirements met |
| Appropriate method to calculate fee amount | Walsh: Lodestar (hours × reasonable rates) based on contemporaneous billing | Respondent: Agreed statutory requirements met and recommended special master set reasonable amount | Held — Lodestar applied consistent with Avera and Blum; special master may adjust but none warranted |
| Reasonableness of hourly rates requested | Walsh: Rates mirror prior awards (McCulloch) and Office of Special Masters fee schedule for later years | Respondent: Did not object to rates | Held — Requested rates found reasonable and approved |
| Reasonableness of hours and costs billed | Walsh: Submitted contemporaneous, detailed billing and receipts for attorneys’ hours and expenses; requested full reimbursement | Respondent: No objection | Held — Hours and costs reviewed and found reasonable; full amounts awarded |
Key Cases Cited
- Avera v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 515 F.3d 1343 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (approves lodestar method for Vaccine Act fee awards)
- Blum v. Stenson, 465 U.S. 886 (1984) (lodestar—hours multiplied by reasonable rate)
- Saxton v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 3 F.3d 1517 (Fed. Cir. 1993) (deference to special masters and use of prior experience in fee review)
- Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424 (1983) (hours that are excessive, redundant, or unnecessary should be excluded)
- Perreira v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 27 Fed. Cl. 29 (1992) (special masters’ discretion in fee determinations)
- Beck v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 924 F.2d 1029 (Fed. Cir. 1991) (award intended to cover all legal expenses; attorney prohibited from collecting additional fees)