UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

JOHN RELVAS, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

V.

THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN, et a!.,

Defendants.

Case No.: l:14-cv-01752-RCL

MEMORANDUM OPINION

I. LIABILITY

This civil action was filed under 28 U.S.C. § 1605A and arises out ofthe bombing ofthe

United States Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon onOctober 23,1983. Foleyv. Islamic

Republic ofIran^'^o. 14-CV-01752-RCL (D.D.C. 2014). EOF No. 1(Complaint). The nearly

80 plaintiffs inthis action include servicemen killed orinjured inthe terrorist attack, their

estates, and family members. Defendants were served through diplomatic channels onMay 17,

2016. ECF No. 38. Prompted by defendants' failure to answer, and upon affidavit by plaintiffs'

counsel, the clerk ofcourt entered a default against defendants on July 21, 2016. ECF Nos. 39

and 40. On July 27, 2016, plaintiffs' counsel filed amotion for default judgment, asking this

Court "to takenotice of the liability decisions entered in the relatedcases of Peterson v. Islamic

Republic ofIran {Peterson 7), 264 F.Supp.2d. 46 (D.D.C. 2003) and Fain v. Islamic Republic of

Iran, 856 F.Supp.2d 109 (D.D.C. 2012)." ECF No. 41. That same day, plaintiffs' counsel

moved for the appointment ofa special master. ECF No. 42. This Court granted both motions

on October 25, 2016. ECF No. 45.
II. DAMAGES

Damages available under the FSIA-created cause of action "include economic damages,

solatium, pain and suffering, and punitive damages." 28 U.S.C. § 1605A(c). Survivors may

recover damages for their pain and suffering; estatesof the deceased may recover economic

losses stemming from wrongful death to the victims of terrorism; family membersmay recover

solatium for their emotional injury; andallplaintiffs may recover punitive damages. Valore v.

Islamic Republic ofIran, 700 F.Supp.2d 52, 82-83 (D.D.C. 2010).

Under theFSIA, a "default winner mustprove damages in the same manner andto the

same extent as anyotherdefaultwinner." Hill v. Republic ofIraq, 328 F.3d 680,683 (D.C. Cir.

2003). A plaintiff"must provethat the consequences of the defendants' conduct were

'reasonably certain (i.e., more likely than not) to occur, and must prove the amount ofthe

damages by a reasonable estimate consistent with this [Circuit's] application ofthe American

rule on damages.'" Salazar v. Islamic Republic ofIran, 370 F.Supp.2d 105,115-16 (D.D.C.

2005) (quoting Hill, 328 F.3d at 681 (internal quotations omitted)). Plaintiffs in this action have

amply demonstrated that defendants' commission ofacts ofextrajudicial killing and provision of

material support and resources for such killing were reasonably certain to- and indeed intended

to - cause injury to plaintiffs. Peterson v. Islamic Republic ofIran {Peterson 77), 515 F.Supp.2d

25, 37 (D.D.C. 2007).

Apropos ofdamage awards, theCourt has received andreviewed the recommendations of

the special master and hereby ADOPTS, without discussion, all facts found by and

recommendations made by the special master which conform to the well-established damages

frameworks articulated below. See Peterson II, at 52-53; Valore, 700 F.Supp.2d at 84-87. The
Court will, however, discuss those instances where the special masterhasrecommended awards

that deviate from these frameworks.

A. Pain and Suffering

Assessing appropriate damages for physical injury or mental disability depends upon a

myriad of factors. Where"death wasinstantaneous there can be no recovery " Elahi v.

IslamicRepublic ofIran, 124 F.Supp.2d 97,112 (D.D.C. 2000) (citation omitted). See also

Thuneibat v. Syrian ArabRepublic, 167 F.Supp.3d 22,39 n.4 (D.D.C. 2016) (where plaintiffs

"submit[] no evidence ... showing that either of the [vjictims suffered any painand suffering

prior to their deaths in the suicide bombings," damages must be denied). Victims who survived a

few minutes to a few hours afterthe bombing typically receive an award of $1 million. Elahi,

124 F.Supp.2d at 113.

For victims surviving for a longer period oftime, this Court considers "the severity ofthe

pain immediately following the injury, the length ofhospitalization, andthe extent ofthe

impairment that will remain with the victim for the rest ofhis orher life." Peterson //, 515

F.Supp.2d at52 n. 26 (citing Blais v. Islamic Republic ofIran, 459 F.Supp.2d 40, 59 (D.D.C.

2006)). In Peterson II, this Court adopted a general procedure for the calculation ofdamages

that begins with the baseline assumption that persons suffering substantial injuries in terrorist

attacks are entitled to $5 million in compensatory damages. Id. at 54. This approach is not

rigidly applied, however, and this Court has indicated itwill "depart upward from this baseline to

$7—$12 million in more severe instances ofphysical and psychological pain, such as where

victims suffered relatively more numerous and severe injuries, were rendered quadriplegic,

partially lost vision and hearing, or were mistaken for dead," Valore, 700 F.Supp.2d at 84, and

-3-
will "depart downward to $2-$3million where victims suffered only minor shrapnel injuries or

minorinjuryfrom small-armsfire." O'Brien v. Islamic RepublicofIran, 853 F.Supp.2d 44,47

(D.D.C. 2012) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted).

For servicemen suffering emotional, but no physical injury, this Court has adopted a

general framework for the calculation ofpain and suffering damages whereby they are "typically

awarded $1.5 million." Worley v. IslamicRepublic ofIran, 177 F.3d 283,286 (D.D.C. 2016).

See alsoDavis v. Islamic Republic ofIran, 882 F.Supp.2d 7 (D.D.C. 2012) (awarding $1.5

million in damages to Marine stationed aboard USS Iwo Jimaat time of attack butparticipated in

recovery efforts andsuffered from PTSD). See alsoPeterson, 515 F.Supp.2d at 56; Valore, 700

F.Supp.2d at 84.

The following represent instances where the special master'srecommended awards for

painandsuffering damages do not comport withthe frameworks articulated above.

1. Upward Departures

a) Mark Boyd

The special master recommended that Mark Boyd receive anenhancement of$500,000 to

the $1.5 million typically awarded to victims who "suffer[ed] severe emotional injury without

physical injury." Kaplan v. Hezbollah, 213 F.Supp.3d 27,36 (D.D.C. 2016) (citing Harrison v.

Republic ofSudan, 882 F.Supp.2d 23,49 (D.D.C. 2012)). Mr. Boyd's testimony revealed he was

assigned the particularly gruesome task oflocating the body parts ofthose killed by the blast and

placing severed heads, arms, legs, and torsos ofhis fellow servicemen into body bags.

In recommending an enhancement, the special master reasoned that, unlike many

servicemen whose claims ofPTSD are either self-diagnosed or evaluated only after the initiation

-4-
ofalawsuit, Mr. Boyd's records reflect no fewer than 33 attempts on his part to seek psychiatric

intervention. Further, medical records corroborate Mr. Boyd suffering from agalaxy of ailments

in addition to PTSD, including debilitating "mood disturbances such as depression, anxiety,

feelings ofanger; chronic sleep disturbances; difficulty with social interaction; lack of

concentration; and increasing social isolation resulting in severe, but less than total, social and

occupational impairment." The $1.5 million baseline established by this Court recognizes that

all survivors ofthe Beirut massacre are presumed to suffer "lasting and severe psychological

problems from the attack." Estate ofDoe v. Islamic Republic ofIran, 943 F.Supp.2d 180,188

(D.D.C. 2013). An enhancement is warranted where asurvivor presents with aprofound set of

documented ailments resulting from their experience. The Court agrees that such an

enhancement is appropriate in this instance and ADOPTS the special master's recommendation

that Mark Boyd be awarded $2 million for pain and suffering.

(b) John Ijames

The special master recommended that John Ijames be awarded $2 million for pain and

suffering - reflecting an enhancement of$500,000 from the baseline award established by this

Court. Mr. Ijames was involved in the nansport ofdead servicemen from land to the USS Iwo

Jima and was assigned the horrific task ofhandling the bodies ofservicemen who were burned

and disfigured beyond recognition.

The special master based his recommendation not only on Mr. Ijames' detailed

description ofhis service-related traumas but on medical records indicating Mr. Ijames suffers

from service-related "PTSD, bipolar, depression severe without psychosis, insomnia related to

mental, alcohol dependence," "borderline schizophrenia," and "intense and intrusive memories

5-
ofhis time in the service, frequent panic attacks (with tachycardia, profound anxiety and sweats),

nightmares, insomnia, uncontrollable tears, over-reactive startle, and episodes of extreme anger

with violent outbursts." On this record, the Court agrees that Mr. Ijames' ailments go well

beyond the normal range ofpost-traumatic stress disorders which generally inform the baseline

award set out in Worley and ADOPTS the special master's recommendation that Mr. Ijames be

awarded $2million in damages for pain and suffering.

(c) Gregory Simmons

The special master recommended that Gregory Simmons receive an enhancement of

$500,000 in compensation for his service-related pain and suffering. Gregory Simmons was

among those involved in the recovery effort immediately following the October 23 bombing.

His testimony recounts the week he spent uncovering bodies with "missing limbs, chunks of

flesh, decapitated, just dead." He recalls working in one area which "smelled ofblood, a lot of

blood mixed with explosives that you justcan't describe it, but you won't forget it." His

contemporaneous letters tohis family recount finding fellow servicemen "decapitated [n]o

arms, no legs, no faces," and describe one incident when he "picked up a body and the skin

peeled off in [his] hands."

Mr. Simmons' medical records are equally detailed in theirdescription of the

constellation of maladies Mr. Simmonssuffered, and continues to suffer, as a direct result of his

experiences inBeirut. Records supplied from theVAindicate he is afflicted with"bipolar II

disorder andPTSD, chronic," for whichhe has beenprescribed several psychotropic

medications, andas being"hypervigilant, quickto anger, isolates himselffor daysat a time, has

nightmares, difficulty sleeping and has difficulty in crowds." On this record, the Court ADOPTS
the special master'srecommendation that Mr. Simmons be awarded $2 millionin damages for

pain and suffering.

2. Downward Departures

a) Al Duncan

The special master recommended that Al Duncan receive $750,000 - an award

representing halfof the $1.5 million baseline established in Worley. Mr. Duncan, although

present atBeirut atthe timeof the bombing, was amember of an amphibious unitstationed at an

"impact zone," - an "area where we witnessed the actual rubble ofthe barracks and the first

responders thatwere working there, the overturned vehicles, just the levels of thebarracks that

collapsed." And although forced to view the "vehicles, trucks still overturned, not cleaned up as

ofyet," aswell as"remnants ofUnited States flags and furniture, personal effects," Mr. Duncan

neither engaged in the rescue operation nor endured the trauma ofsearching for survivors or

collecting the remains ofthe blast's victims. He attributes his alleged trauma, instead, tothe

overall "destruction"; to having been on "high alert"; to being exposed to the "smell ofa strong

odor ofexplosives"; and to being under sniper fire for seven days ina skirmish unrelated tothe

terrorist attack. And although Mr. Duncan was diagnosed with PTSD, his diagnosis was made in

2013 - after he had been employed for years as an employee ofthe New York City Department

ofCorrections; after serving as amember ofthe Emergency Services Unit which responded to

Ground Zero in Manhattan on 9/11; and after spending "the next approximately four and ahalfto

five months rotating from Ground Zero to Fresh Kills Landfill." The presumption articulated in

Dob —that survivors ofthe Beirut bombing suffer emotional trauma —does notrelieve claimants

from demonstrating a nexus between the terror attack and their claimed damages. This Court

7-
agrees withthe special masterthat Mr. Duncan has not demonstrated such a nexus andADOPTS

the recommendation thatMr. Duncan be awarded $750,000 in damages for painand suffering,

b) Ross Morrison

The special master recommended that Ross Morrison receive a reduced award of

$750,000. The special master's recommendation was based on testimony thatMr. Morrison was

notpart ofthe search andrescue effort; thathe only viewed the aftermath of the bombing from a

distance; andthatthe wound he received was the resultof a "secondary attack"unrelated to the

bombing. Mr. Morrison does not describe suffering from anyof the array ofsymptoms or

traumas which have plagued similarly-situated servicemen nor did he, at anytime, seek medical

assistance. The Court agrees with the special master's findings andADOPTS the special

master's recommendation that RossMorrison be awarded $750,000 in compensatory damages

for pain and suffering.

B. Economic Loss

The estates ofthose servicemen killed inthe terrorist attack have proven to the

satisfaction of the specialmaster, and thus to the satisfaction ofthis Court, the loss of accretions

resulting from these wrongful deaths. Valore, 700 F.Supp.2d at 85. The Court therefore

ADOPTS, without modification, the special master's recommended damage awards for

economic loss.

C. Solatium

This Court developed a standardized approach for FSIA intentional infliction of

emotional distress, or solatium, claims in Heiser v. Islamic Republic ofIran, 466 F.Supp.2d 229

(D.D.C. 2006). InHeiser, this Court surveyed damages awarded to the family members ofthe
deceased victims ofterrorism and determined, based onaverages, that "[s]pouses typically

receive greater damage awards than parents [orchildren], who, in turn, typically receive greater

awards thansiblings." Id. at 269. Specifically, thisCourt established a framework whereby

spouses of deceased victims receive approximately $8million, while parents receive $5million

and siblings receive $2.5 million. Id. See also Valore, 700 F.Supp.2d at 85 (observing that

courts have "adopted the framework setforth in Heiser as'an appropriate measure of damages

for the family members of victims'") (quoting Peterson //, 515F.Supp.2d at 51).

When applying thisframework, thisCourt ismindful that "[tjhese numbers ...are notset

instone," Murphy v. Islamic Republic ofIran, 740 F.Supp.2d 51,79 (D.D.C. 2010), and that

deviations may be warranted when confronted with "evidence establishing anespecially close

relationship between the plaintiff and decedent, particularly in comparison to the normal

interactions to be expected given the familial relationship" orwith "medical proofofsevere pain,

grieforsuffering onbehalfof the claimant and circumstances surrounding theterrorist attack

[rendered] the suffering particularly more acute or agonizing." Oveissi vIslamic Republic of

Iran, 768 F.Supp.2d 16,26-27 (D.D.C. 2011). Conversely, downward departures may be

appropriate where the evidence suggests that the relationship between the victim and his family

members is attenuated, Valore, 700 F.Supp.2d at 86, or where a claimant fails to "prove damages

inthe same manner and to the same extent as any other default winner." Hill, 328 F.3d at 683.

The following represents instances where the special master's recommended awards for

loss ofsolatium deviate from the Heiser framework.

1. Upward Departures

a) William Faulk

9-
The special master recommended that William Faulk, whose brotherJames Faulk was

kdled on October 23,1983, receive asolatium award in the amount of$3 million -reflecting a

$500,000 enhancement from the baseline established in Heiser. The special master found

evidence of an "especially close relationship, particularly in comparison to the normal

interactions to be expected given the familial relationship," Oveissi, 768 F.Supp.2d at 27,

compelling such an enhancement. Aside from being close in age, the testimony revealed that

William was asurrogate father for James during their parents' prolonged absences, that the

brothers were placed mthe foster system together, worked for the same employer, engaged in

activities together, did homework together and generally enjoyed arelationship more intimate

than that shared by most siblings. The Court agrees with the special master's recommendation

that William Faulk be awarded $3 million in compensatory damages for loss ofsolatium.

2. Downward Departures

a) Estate ofKenneth Coleman

The special master recommended that Kenneth Coleman, whose brother Marcus Coleman

was killed mBeirut, receive $500,000 less than the presumptive $2.5 million baseline award

established in Heiser. Kenneth died prior to the filing ofthis action. The special master based

his recommendation on the paucity ofevidence describing the relationship between the brothers.

Kenneth's sister, Marsha, testified only that Kenneth may have hosted Marcus' high school

graduation party. His brother, Michael, assumed, for reasons not stated in the record, that

Kenneth's alcohol abuse and inability to maintain steady employment was the result ofMarcus'

death. No other family member offered any glimpse into the relationship between the two

brothers. The Court agrees that Kenneth failed to "prove damages in the same manner and to

10-
the same extent as any other default winner "Hill, 328 F.3d at 683, and therefore ADOPTS the

special master srecommendation that the Estate ofKenneth Coleman be awarded $2 million in

compensatory damages for loss ofsolatium.

D. Punitive Damages

In assessing punitive damages, this Court has observed that any award must balance the

concern that "Recurrent awards in case after case arising out ofthe same facts can financially

cripple adefendant, over-punishing the same conduct through repeated awards with little

deterrent effect...," Murphy, 740 F.Supp.2d at 75, against the need to continue to deter "the

brutal actions ofdefendants in planning, supporting and aiding the execution of[terrorist

attacks]." Rimkus v. Islamic Republic ofIran, 750 F.Supp.2d 163,184 (D.D.C. 2010). In

furtherance ofthis goal, this Court held that the calculation ofpunitive damages in subsequent

related actions should be tied directly to the ratio ofpunitive to compensatory damages set forth

in earlier cases. Murphy, 740 F.Supp.2d at 76. The ratio of$3.44 was established in Valore - an

earlier FSIA case arising out ofthe Beirut bombing. Id. at 82-83 (citing Valore, 700 F.Supp.2d

at 52). The Court will again apply this same $3.44 ratio, resulting in atotal punitive damages

award of$955,652,324.

CONCLUSION

This Court appreciates the efforts by plaintiffs to hold Iran and its Ministry of

Intelligence accountable for their support ofterrorism. The Court concludes that defendants must

be punished to the fullest extent legally possible for the bombing in Beirut on October 23,1983 -

adepraved act that devastated the lives ofcountless individuals and their families, including the

nearly 80 plaintiffs who are parties to this lawsuit. This Court hopes that the victims and their

-IN
families may find some measure ofsolace from this Court's final judgment. As stated, the Court

finds defendants responsible for the injuries sustained by the plaintiffs and thus liable under the

FSIA's state-sponsored terrorism exception for $207,222,647.03 in compensatory damages and

$712,845,905.78 in punitive damages, for atotal award of $920,068,552.81

Aseparate Order and Judgment consistent with these findings shall be entered this date.

SO ORDERED.

DATE:

-12-

c.

Royce C. Lamberth

United States District Court for the

District of Columbia