Legal Opinion
Crutchfield v. Secretary of Health & Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided September 8, 2014No. 09-39 VPublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-10 et seg. (2012); MMR vaccine; Diabetes Type 1.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND FINAL ORDER
BRADEN, Judge.
Amy Crutchfield (“Petitioner”) claims entitlement to compensation under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, codified as amended at 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-10 et seq. (2012) (the “Vaccine Act”), because she developed Type 1 diabetes mellitus (“Type 1 diabetes”) following a measles-mumps-rubella (“MMR”) vaccination.
On April 7, 2014, Special Master George L. Hastings, Jr. (the “special master”) denied Petitioner’s claim for…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Stern v. MarshallSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
- Althen v. Secretary of Health and Human ServicesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2005
- Lyng v. Northwest Indian Cemetery Protective Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Den Ex Dem. Murray v. Hoboken Land & Improvement Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1856
- Andreu Ex Rel. Andreu v. Secretary of Health and Human ServicesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2009
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Bangerter v. Secretary of Health and Human ServicesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2022
- Bhattacharyya v. Secretary of Health and Human ServicesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2020
- D.G. v. Secretary of Heath and Human ServicesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2019
- Dinh v. Secretary of Health and Human ServicesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2022
- Doles v. Secretary of Health and Human ServicesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2022
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.