SIMANSKI 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 special master could rule on the merits without the respondent filing evidence to contest the petition
• Noting that “the Vaccine Rules provide that the special masters can decide cases on written submissions, including, in appropriate cases, by summary judgment.”
• noting that “the Vaccine Rules provide that the special masters can decide cases on written submissions, including, in appropriate cases, by summary judgment”
• Noting that “the Vaccine Rules provide that the special masters can decide cases on written submissions, including, in appropriate cases, by summary judgment.”
• noting that “the Vaccine Rules provide that the special masters can decide cases on written submissions, including, in appropriate cases, by summary judgment”
• finding that it was a violation of due process for a special master to rule on the record at “an early procedural stage” before respondent had “present[ed] its position with respect to the petition and the supporting evidence”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).