Legal Opinion

O'Connell v. Secretary of Health & Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims

Decided November 12, 2004No. 97-682 VPublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

HEWITT, Judge.

Petitioner, appearing pro se, seeks review in the United States Court of Federal Claims of a special master’s dismissal of petitioner’s Petition for Compensation (Petition) under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (Vaccine Act or Act), 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-l to -25 (2000). In a decision filed May 28, 2004, the special master noted that petitioner’s claim, which alleged that a rubella vaccine caused his chronic arthritis,1 was initiated more than one year after the 36-month statutory deadline for filing his Petition had expired. O’Connell v. Sec’y of Health &…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better EnvironmentSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
  2. Landis v. North American Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1936
  3. Irwin v. Department of Veterans AffairsSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  4. United States v. KubrickSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  5. United States v. Nordic Village, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1992

26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Corrigan v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2006
  2. Moreno v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2008
  3. Lockwood v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2008
  4. Roth v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2006
  5. Eason v. Secretary of Health and Human ServicesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2022

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API