Today we won an appeal for a vaccine injured client at the Court of Federal Claims in Washington D.C. This claim was denied initially by the lower court on a very technical question about the timing between the vaccination and the onset of injury. In other words, a long time had passed between vaccination and the client’s injury. As is often the case in the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, these injuries can be rare medical conditions without robust medical research. In order to win the case, we often have to rely on limited medical research and less established medical theories, which makes it easy for the opposing side to point out how we’re presenting novel ideas that have not yet stood the test of time. It’s the unavoidable reality of some of these medical conditions.
We wouldn’t take no for an answer and appealed the decision to deny compensation. The great news is that a federal judge took the time to ask detailed questions about our medical expert and the scientific literature. This judge agreed that the lower court had not acknowledged how strong our medical theory was and had improperly dismissed the case.
This case may have larger impacts for the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program by helping prove that sometimes these injuries happen after a longer time than doctors expect, and that all medical research needs to be considered.
This decision today, although exciting and favorable for our client, does not end the journey. This hearing only related to the question of timing of the injury, and we must still prevail on other questions about this medical condition. And so, it’s back to work!
Comentarios