Legal Opinion · Dissent

Figueroa Ex Rel. Estate of Figueroa v. Secretary of Health & Human Services

Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Decided May 1, 2013No. 2012-5064Published

1DissentProst, Circuit Judge

The majority’s opinion clearly conflicts with binding Supreme Court precedent, the plain language of the Vaccine Act, and decades of consistent decisions by the United States Court of Federal Claims. I must respectfully dissent.

I

The majority holds that Ms. Figueroa’s petition with the National Vaccine Compensation Program was permissible because she was the legal representative of Mr. Figueroa’s estate and Mr. Figueroa’s cause of action for injuries he sustained from a vaccine survived his unrelated death. To reach that conclusion, the majority does not rely on any express language in the…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Carlson v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  2. Marx v. General Revenue Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2013
  3. Miles v. Apex Marine Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990
  4. Robertson v. WegmannSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  5. National Railroad Passenger Corporation v. National Assn. of Railroad PassengersSupreme Court of the United States · 1974

13 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