William Taylor, Parent of Joseph Taylor, a Minor v. Secretary of Health & Human Services 0
108 Fed. Cl. 807
| Fed. Cl. | 2013Background
- Joseph Taylor, a minor, allegedly suffered off-Table encephalopathy and seizures after December 5, 2003 DTaP vaccination.
- Petitioner invokes the Vaccine Act’s off-Table causation standard (Althen test) to prove vaccine-caused injury.
- Special Master Dee Lord denied compensation; petitioners challenged on four grounds.
- Court reviews whether the Special Master applied proper causation standards and weighed medical/epidemiological evidence.
- Petitioner’s theory centered on a pertussis-toxin mechanism; Respondent offered epidemiology and alternative etiologies.
- Court affirms denial, finding no preponderant evidence that DTaP caused Joseph’s infantile spasms.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the Master apply proper causation standard? | Taylor argues heightened burden of proof; requires direct mechanism evidence. | Guggenheim contends standard is Althen with preponderance, not certainty. | Master correctly applied Althen; no certainty required. |
| Was epidemiological evidence properly weighed? | Paucity of literature not fatal; epidemiology may support causation. | Extensive epidemiology supports no causal link between DTaP and spasms. | Special Master properly weighed epidemiology; findings supported by record. |
| Did Petitioner establish a logical sequence of causation? | Dr. Griesemer's theory shows logical link from vaccine to injury. | Links are illogical or unsupported by evidence (e.g., blood-brain barrier breach). | No logical sequence established; theory speculative and unsupported. |
| Does temporal proximity equate to causation here? | Seizures occurred within hours of vaccination; supports causation. | Latency and clinical data show no short-interval causal link. | Temporal proximity insufficient for causation; not determinative. |
| Did treating physicians' opinions establish causation? | Treating physicians’ observations are probative of causation. | Record shows treating notes only note temporal relation, not causation. | Treating-physician testimony insufficient to prove causation under Althen. |
Key Cases Cited
- Althen v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 418 F.3d 1274 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (three-prong Althen test for off-Table causation)
- Moberly v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 592 F.3d 1315 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (requires more than speculative causation; preponderance standard)
- Andreu v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 569 F.3d 1367 (Fed. Cir. 2009) (treating physicians' opinions can be probative but not conclusive)
- Capizzano v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 440 F.3d 1317 (Fed. Cir. 2006) (logical sequence requirement; circumstantial evidence allowed)
- Hibbard v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 698 F.3d 1355 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (preponderance standard; totality of evidence reviewed)
- de Bazan v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 539 F.3d 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (causation assessment in Vaccine Act cases)
- Grant v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 956 F.2d 1144 (Fed. Cir. 1992) (c considerations in causation cases)
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharm., Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (U.S. 1993) (epistemic standard for scientific evidence)