Paul v. Avril

901 F. Supp. 330, 1994 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20667, 1994 WL 854656
CourtDistrict Court, S.D. Florida
DecidedJuly 1, 1994
Docket91-399-CIV
StatusPublished
Cited by24 cases

This text of 901 F. Supp. 330 (Paul v. Avril) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Paul v. Avril, 901 F. Supp. 330, 1994 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20667, 1994 WL 854656 (S.D. Fla. 1994).

Opinion

FINAL JUDGMENT GRANTING DEFAULT AND AWARDING DAMAGES

FERGUSON, District Judge.

This case involves the claims of six prominent Haitian citizens, opponents of the ruling military regime, for damages suffered by torture and false imprisonment directed by Prosper Avril who was then military ruler. 1 The torts were committed in Haiti in 1989 and 1990 during the defendant’s reign as head of government.

Plaintiffs, all citizens of Haiti, sought relief under the Alien Tort Statute, 28 U.S.C.A. § 1350, which provides district courts with original jurisdiction over civil actions brought by aliens for torts committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States. The summons and complaint were served on defendant Avril in his home in Miami Lakes, Florida, on February 28, 1991. Defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint was denied by this Court in 1993, in Paul v. Avril, 812 F.Supp. 207 (S.D.Fla.1993). After that adverse ruling, the defendant declined to participate further in the case. At the hearing to determine the proper amount of damages to be awarded in this case, no defense was presented.

All six plaintiffs filed extensive documentary evidence in support of their claims for damages, including affidavits and medical records. The declarations of three experts were presented, including the exiled Chief Justice of the Haitian Supreme Court, an expert on the command structure of the Haitian military and police, and an expert on the human rights situation in Haiti. Oral testimony presented at the hearing included the testimony of plaintiff Fernand Gerard Lafor-est and human rights expert William G. O’Neil. Based on the documentary and testi *332 monial evidence, the Court makes the following factual findings:

1. Plaintiff Evans Paul is currently the elected mayor of the capital of Haiti, Port-au-Prince, although he has been prevented from performing the duties of the office since the 1991 military coup. A long-time opponent of military rule, in 1986 he helped organize a coalition of grassroots organizations which protested continuing military rule and human rights violations.

2. Plaintiff Jean Auguste Mesyeux, who currently lives in exile in Canada, was a co-founder of Haiti’s largest trade union, the Autonomous Federation of Haitian Workers. As the executive secretary, he was actively involved in organizing opposition to military rule during the regime of defendant Avril.

3. Plaintiff Marino Etienne currently lives in exile in Paris, France. A former sergeant in the Presidential Guard, Etienne was the leader of a group of former soldiers committed to democratic reform in Haiti.

4. On October 30, 1989, plaintiffs Paul, Mesyeux and Etienne appeared at a televised press conference where they called for a month-long nonviolent protest to demand democratic reforms from the government of General Avril. They participated in the press conference as leaders of the Rassem-blement National, a coalition of organizations supporting democratic change.

5. On November 1, 1989, Paul, Mesyeux and Etienne were lured to a meeting at the home of a member of the military. Soldiers from the Presidential guard and other military units detained the plaintiffs without warrant or charge. The soldiers pushed the plaintiffs to the ground, beat them with truncheons, boots and guns, and threatened to kill them. They were thrown into a jeep and taken to Police Headquarters.

6. At Police Headquarters, the beatings of plaintiffs Paul, Mesyeux, and Etienne continued. Soldiers used nightsticks to beat their backs, kidneys and the soles of their feet. Their testicles were pulled and squeezed. When they fainted from the pain, the soldiers revived them by singeing the hair in their nostrils with fire from cigarette lighters.

7. High-ranking military officials interrogated Paul, Mesyeux, and Etienne as they were beaten with iron bars, rifle butts, helmets and fists. Etienne was forced into the “djak” position, in which his hands and feet were bound and his body was suspended from a pole.

8. On November 2, 1989, Paul, Mesyeux, and Etienne were forced to appear on television while false charges were read against them. They were then returned to prison where they were detained for three months. Medical treatment was denied for one week and administered only sporadically and inadequately thereafter.

9. As a result of his ordeal, Evans Paul suffered broken ribs, a herniated disc, a perforated lung, a crushed hip, a fractured back, and pain and inflammation in his genitals and right ear. He was confined to a wheelchair for a year and continues to walk with a limp. He can no longer run or play with his children, suffers from migraines and pain in his eyes, hip and groin, and bears scars on his scalp, back and face. Paul also suffers fear and anxiety, fatigue, and has difficulty sleeping.

10. The beatings caused Jean-Auguste Mesyeux to experience throbbing headaches and severe pain and swelling in his wrists, feet, and groin. Mesyeux’s severe injuries required him to seek medical treatment in the United States in March 1990. He still suffers pain in his hips, lower back and the soles of his feet, making it impossible to stand for extended periods of time. In addition, Mesyeux’s vision is now impaired and he has occasional headaches. Due to the physical ailments resulting from the torture, Mesyeux has been unable to continue working as director of the trade union.

11. Marino Etienne, as a result of the beatings, suffered a punctured eardrum, three broken fingers, recurring migraine headaches and severe injuries to his back and waist. For several weeks after the torture he was only partially conscious, and was delirious from the pain. His right arm is virtually paralyzed, as are two fingers on his right hand. He has lost hearing in his right ear and most of the sight in his right eye. *333 He suffers from recurring migraine headaches and pain in his kidneys and groin which makes urination painful. His psychological trauma manifests itself in terrifying flashbacks and a highly-agitated emotional state. He has incurred significant medical expenses which have limited his ability to support his wife and nine children. Etienne has been unable to find work in France because his injuries inhibit physical activity.

12. Plaintiff Gerald Emile “Aby” Brun was a leader of the opposition political movement called the party of the National Congress of Democratic Movements (KONA-KOM). On January 20th, 1990, defendant Avril declared a state of siege and Brun was arbitrarily arrested and detained at a K0-NAKOM meeting at the Ecumenical Center for Human Rights in Port-au-Prince. At about 12:15 p.m., approximately 15 heavily-armed Presidential Guard soldiers, members of Avril’s personal security detail and policemen, stormed the building shouting threats, beating people, and ordering everyone to lie down.

13. The armed men handcuffed Brun, forced him to the ground, battered his buttocks, back and kidneys with truncheons, stomped on his back, spit in his face, shouted threats and slashed his skin with broomsticks and thorny branches as neighbors watched his suffering and humiliation.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Arbeeny v. Cuomo
Second Circuit, 2025
Arbeeny v. Cuomo
E.D. New York, 2025
Jaramillo v. Naranjo
S.D. Florida, 2021
Mamani v. Berzaín
21 F. Supp. 3d 1353 (S.D. Florida, 2014)
Saludes v. Republica De Cuba
655 F. Supp. 2d 1290 (S.D. Florida, 2009)
Licea v. Curacao Drydock Co., Inc.
584 F. Supp. 2d 1355 (S.D. Florida, 2008)
Mwani v. Bin Ladin
244 F.R.D. 20 (District of Columbia, 2007)
Presbyterian Church of Sudan v. Talisman Energy, Inc.
226 F.R.D. 456 (S.D. New York, 2005)
Doe v. Liu Qi
349 F. Supp. 2d 1258 (N.D. California, 2004)
Kaweesa v. Ashcroft
345 F. Supp. 2d 79 (D. Massachusetts, 2004)
Kane v. Winn
319 F. Supp. 2d 162 (D. Massachusetts, 2004)
Villeda Aldana v. Fresh Del Monte Produce, Inc.
305 F. Supp. 2d 1285 (S.D. Florida, 2003)
Alvarez-Machain v. United States
331 F.3d 604 (Ninth Circuit, 2003)
Chiminya Tachiona v. Mugabe
216 F. Supp. 2d 262 (S.D. New York, 2002)
Mehinovic v. Vuckovic
198 F. Supp. 2d 1322 (N.D. Georgia, 2002)
Lambert v. Fulton County, Ga.
97 F. Supp. 2d 1380 (N.D. Georgia, 2000)
Flatow v. Islamic Republic of Iran
999 F. Supp. 1 (District of Columbia, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
901 F. Supp. 330, 1994 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20667, 1994 WL 854656, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/paul-v-avril-flsd-1994.