Legal Opinion

Rochester v. United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided October 10, 1989No. 89-4VPublishedCited by 260 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER

MEROW, Judge.

Under the National Childhood Vaccine Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-l, et seq. (Supp. V 1987), this matter comes before the court on the basis of the Report and Recommendation, filed September 8, 1989, of the assigned Special Master, David A. Gerard.

No objection to the Special Master’s findings or conclusions of law has been filed and the time to so file has expired.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:(1) With the exception of the recommendation with respect to finding a default, the report, including the findings and conclusions of law, filed September 8, 1989, is adopted…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. In Re Georgea Kosmadakes, Adult Ward, Julia K. Maghan, James A. Crooks, Successor, Conservator, and Auditor of the CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1971

3Cited by260 opinions

  1. Raymo v. Secretary of Health and Human ServicesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2016
  2. Carraggio v. Secretary of Department of Health & Human ServicesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1997
  3. Manley v. Secretary of the Department of Health & Human ServicesUnited States Court of Claims · 1989
  4. Monteverdi v. Secretary of the Department of Health & Human ServicesUnited States Court of Claims · 1990
  5. A. v. Secretary of Health and Human ServicesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2020

255 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