Evaluating Novel and Relevant Information for Children's Health and Emotional Development

Search our Website

  • Bailey Banks Case

    On 26 June 2002, the Petitioner filed a petition for compensation under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 (Vaccine Act or Act)2 alleging that, as a result of the MMR vaccination received on 14 March 2000, his child, Bailey, suffered a seizure and Acute Disseminated Encephalomyelitis (“ADEM”),3 which led to Pervasive Developmental Delay (“PDD”),4 a condition from which he continues to suffer (the "Petition"). By the terms of the Petition itself, Petitioner brought this action under an actual causation theory of recovery, as the seizure was alleged to have occurred on 30 March 2000, sixteen days after the vaccination date, and outside of the time periods set on the Table. Petition at 2.



    A New Theory of Autism Causation? The Case of Bailey Banks

    A ruling from Federal Vaccine Court — that MMR vaccine caused an autism spectrum disorder in a young boy named Bailey Banks — flies directly in the face of the triple-play decision against a vaccine-autism link issued by the Court on February 12.


    The Special Masters in those three cases inferred that the vaccine-autism theory was the stuff of Alice in Wonderland fantasy, and virtually accused the childrens’ physicians of medical malpractice. (CNN’s Dr. Sanjay Gupta called the Court’s language “snide,” and we agree).

    Meanwhile, the US Department of Health and Human services said the rulings should “help reassure parents that vaccines do not cause autism.” But why should parents feel reassured when two out of five autism cases (40%) – that we know of – have won taxpayer-funded compensation in Vaccine Court?



    Hannah Poling Case

    On October 25, 2002, petitioners, Johnand Jane Doe/77, filed a petition on behalf of their minor child seeking compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensasion Program ("the Vaccine Program") for a vaccine related injury.


    Respondent has conceded that petitioners are entitled to compensation due to the significant aggravation of Child Doe/77's pre-existing mitochondrial disorder based on an MMR vaccine Table presumptive injury of encephalopathy, which eventually manifested as a chronic encephalopathy with features of autism spectrum disorder and a complex partial seizure disorder as a sequela.


    Based on the persuasive factors supporting petitioner's vaccine claim and respondant's election not to challenge petitioner's claim, the undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation under the Vaccine Program.  Accordingly, a determination of damages is appropriate.



    Eric Lassiter Case

    This case arises under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (hereinafter Vaccine Act, Act, or Program) found at 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 300aa 1 - et seq. (West 1991 & Supp. 1995). Petitioner's mother, Mrs. Mary Lassiter, filed this claim on behalf of her son on September 28, 1990 alleging that as a result of the administration of a diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus (DPT) shot on April 19, 1972, petitioner sustained an injury set forth on the Vaccine Injury Table (§ 14 of the Act) namely, an encephalopathy, with permanent neurological damage. Respondent defends by arguing that because no contemporaneous medical records exist that document conclusively that the onset of the injury occurred within the requisite time frame, petitioner has not established a Table injury. Respondent argues further, that petitioner's condition, more likely than not, is due to autism and is unrelated to the DPT vaccine. Following [*2] a careful review of the record in its entirety, the court concludes that Eric Lassiter is entitled to compensation.



    Vaccine Court: Autism Debate Continues

    On February 12, the federal "Vaccine Court" in Washington issued a sweeping ruling in three highly touted "test cases" against families who claimed that their childrens' autism had been caused by vaccines. The Special Masters in those three cases found that Petitioners failed to establish causation between MMR vaccines, the mercury-laced vaccine preservative thimerosal, and autism (the court decision, which is under appeal, deferred any finding on a thimerosal-only theory of causation). The rulings could have a significant precedential impact on some 5,000 families who opted to bring their cases in the Omnibus Autism Proceedings (OAP) hoping that the vaccine court would officially hold that the MMR vaccine or thimerosal had caused autism in their children.



    Cindy Oxley and Steven Oxley Case

    This case concerns the eligibility of Richelle Oxley (hereinafter Richelle) for compensation under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Compensation Act (hereinafter Vaccine Act or Act). 2 For reasons set forth below, the court concludes that 3 petitioners are entitled to an award as specified hereafter.



    Katea D. Stitt Case

    Petitioner, Katea D. Stitt, filed a petition for vaccine injury compensation on October 2, 2009. In her petition, Petitioner alleges that her mother, Mrs. Stitt, died on November 20, 2008, from GBS, which was caused by the flu vaccine she received on September 25, 2008. Petition.


    Following the submission of medical records and expert reports, an entitlement hearing was held on July 26, 2011, in Washington, DC.5 Petitioner, Ms. Katea Stitt, and Petitioner’s expert witness, Dr. Thomas Morgan, testified for Petitioner. Respondent relied on one witness, her expert witness, Dr. Winfried Raabe. Post-hearing briefing was conducted following the hearing. This case is now ready for ruling.




    Hayle Nicole Graves Case

    The Court of Federal Claims found that Walter Ray Graves and Lisa Graves,

    representatives of the estate of their daughter, Hayley, established that Prevnar, a pneumococcal vaccine, caused Hayley’s death. The Court remanded the case for a determination of damages. Opinion and Order, 101 Fed. Cl. 310 (2011). A reasonable amount of compensation is $315,171.50.