Ashton v. Al Qaeda Islamic

Background

The Ashton plaintiffs moved for final judgments against the Islamic Republic of Iran and for compensatory damages for pain and suffering arising from personal injuries sustained during the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. The moving plaintiffs included people who were at the attack sites or in nearby areas. The motion concerned personal-injury plaintiffs in the related multidistrict litigation.

Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn issued a February 11, 2020 Report and Recommendation. She recommended granting some requests, denying others, and specifying the damages amounts for plaintiffs whose requests should be granted. No party objected to the Report. The court therefore reviewed it for clear error, meaning a clear mistake after reviewing the record, rather than reconsidering the issues from the beginning.

Court’s analysis

The court had adopted a personal-injury damages framework that categorized injuries as significant, severe, or devastating and allowed upward departures in exceptional circumstances.

For Andrzej Cieslik, the court agreed that damages should not be awarded at that time. No representative of Cieslik’s estate had been formally appointed, so awarding personal-injury damages to Cieslik’s surviving spouse as the anticipated estate representative was not appropriate. The court approved the recommendation that Cieslik’s request be denied without prejudice to renewal after a formal estate representative is appointed.

For Leonard Ardizzone, the court found that the recommended pain-and-suffering award was appropriate. It agreed that the evidence described severe injuries sustained during the attacks and that prejudgment interest should be awarded from September 11, 2001, through the date of judgment at 4.96 percent per year, compounded annually.

Disposition

The court adopted Magistrate Judge Netburn’s Report and Recommendation. Its conclusion states that the plaintiffs’ motion for final judgments was GRANTED. It ordered judgments for the Ashton plaintiffs identified in Exhibit A in the amounts listed there, plus prejudgment interest at 4.96 percent per year, compounded annually over the same period. Exhibit A lists Leonard Ardizzone with a pain-and-suffering award of $7,000,000.

The court also ordered that plaintiffs not listed in Exhibit A who had not previously received damages could later apply for punitive, economic, or other damages awards on the approved basis. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the motion in the multidistrict-litigation docket and the related civil action docket.