Court awards $116,413.89 in vaccine injury case fees

In a significant ruling, the United States Court of Federal Claims awarded Loan Nguyen a total of $116,413.89 in attorney fees and costs related to her claim of vaccine injury. This decision affects Nguyen and her legal team, who represented her in a case alleging that an influenza vaccine caused her to develop Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS). The ruling highlights the court's commitment to ensuring that individuals who suffer from vaccine-related injuries receive fair compensation for their legal expenses.

The case, Nguyen v. Secretary of Health and Human Services (Docket No. 19-1188V), was presided over by Special Master Christian J. Moran. The ruling, filed on May 8, 2026, confirms the importance of the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) in protecting the rights of those injured by vaccines and ensuring they have access to necessary legal support.

Background

Loan Nguyen filed her petition on August 13, 2019, with the assistance of the Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC. She alleged that the flu vaccine she received on or about September 25, 2016, caused her to suffer from Guillain-Barre syndrome, a serious neurological condition. The Vaccine Injury Table recognizes a connection between the flu vaccine and GBS when symptoms manifest within a specific timeframe.

The case was assigned to the special processing unit of the Office of Special Masters due to its nature. Over the next few years, Nguyen's legal team gathered evidence, including medical records and affidavits, to support her claim. The Secretary of Health and Human Services expressed interest in resolving the matter informally, but negotiations extended over several months without reaching an agreement.

As the case progressed, it became clear that additional information was needed regarding the onset of Nguyen's neurological problems. The court authorized the Secretary to subpoena a treating physician for further clarification. After extensive discussions and evaluations, the parties eventually reached a settlement agreement in August 2024, which included a lump sum payment and an annuity for Nguyen.

The Ruling

In the recent ruling, the court addressed Nguyen's motion for final attorneys' fees and costs. The court determined that Nguyen was entitled to reasonable attorneys' fees and costs because she received compensation under the Vaccine Act. The total award included $97,927.35 in attorneys' fees, $18,086.54 in attorneys' costs, and $400.00 for personal expenses incurred by Nguyen.

The court ruled, "Ms. Nguyen received compensation. Therefore, she is entitled to an award of her reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs." The court also emphasized the importance of providing detailed and specific billing entries, stating, "The most consequential is the series of entries involving vague billing and block billing."

Special Master Moran noted that the attorneys' fee application was reviewed for its reasonableness, following the lodestar approach, which involves calculating the number of hours reasonably spent on the case multiplied by a reasonable hourly rate. While Nguyen's attorneys had submitted a request for higher fees, the court reduced the total amount by 25% due to issues with vague billing and block billing practices.

Impact

This ruling has important implications for future vaccine injury cases. It reinforces the necessity for legal professionals to maintain clear and detailed records of their work, as vague billing can lead to reductions in awarded fees. The decision also highlights the ongoing commitment of the court to ensure that individuals affected by vaccine injuries receive the support they need, both in terms of compensation and legal representation.

The outcome of this case may encourage other individuals with vaccine-related injuries to seek legal recourse, knowing that the court recognizes the importance of compensating attorneys for their work. Additionally, it serves as a reminder for legal practitioners to adhere to best practices in billing to avoid unnecessary reductions in fees.

What's Next

While the court's decision is final, parties have the option to file a motion for review if they choose to contest any aspects of the ruling. However, details regarding potential appeals or related cases were not available in the court filing. The focus now shifts to the implementation of the awarded fees and costs, ensuring that Nguyen receives the compensation she is entitled to.