Althen v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that petitioners must establish a “persuasive” medical theory that is supported by a “reputable medical or scientific explanation”
• holding that requiring a claimant to provide “medical literature” “contravenes section 300aa-13(a)(l)’s allowance of medical opinion as proof’
• holding that to successfully demonstrate causation-in-fact, petitioner bears a burden to show: (1) a medical theory causally connecting the vaccination and the injury; (2
• holding that Congress created a system in which “close calls regarding causation are resolved in favor of injured claimants”
• holding that none of these elements are required to be established by “scientific certainty,” but only by a preponderance of evidence
• holding that Congress created a system in which “close calls regarding causation are resolved in favor of injured claimants”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).