Jury verdict and judgment for plaintiffs In Re Estate of Ferdinand E. Marcos Human Rights Litigation, MDL No. 840. Tried by Randall H. Scarlett who served as lead counsel for the direct action plaintiffs in all three phases of the trial of this complex case, and who served as one of the class counsel during the mandatory exemplary damage phase of the case which resulted in the record setting $1,200,000,000 judgment.

In 1965, Ferdinand E. Marcos was elected president of the Philippines. In 1969, he was re-elected for his second term. Under the Philippine Constitution, Marcos would have had to leave the office of Presidency after his second term ended in 1973.

Instead, Marcos suspended the Writ of Habeas Corpus, and through Proclamation 1081, (entered September 21, 1972), Marcos imposed martial law in the Philippines.

For the thirteen years that followed before Marcos was deposed in 1986, he ruled as "dictator" of the Philippines. In order to quash legitimate political opposition, Marcos ordered, and failed to prevent, the torture, summary execution, and disappearance of numerous members of the political opposition.

In 1986, Marcos was finally thrown out of office through a popular uprising. He fled to the United States, seeking safe haven. Numerous victims of his atrocities had earlier fled to the United States, and met with Randall H. Scarlett.

In addition to seeking re-dress for his clients, Mr. Scarlett wished to send a strong message, to wit: That the United States would not be a safe haven for the fleeing dictators of the world. Suits were instituted against Ferdinand E. Marcos beginning in 1986, the first suits filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.

The cases were coordinated before the Multi-District Litigation Panel. The Panel assigned the action to Federal District Judge Manuel L. Real (Central District of California). The case was venued in Honolulu, Hawaii.

Ultimately, the case was trifurcated for trial. Plaintiffs' liability verdict was received following trial on September 24, 1992. The $1,200,000,000 exemplary damage verdict on behalf of all plaintiffs was rendered following trial on February 23, 1994. In addition to the exemplary damage verdict, Mr. Scarlett's direct action plaintiffs received millions of dollars of judgments from the jury following conclusion of the compensatory phase of the trial on January 20, 1995. One of Mr. Scarlett's plaintiffs, Manuel Buncio, received the largest compensatory award rendered by the jury, case wide.

This complex international human rights case was the first of its kind. Often written about, and often cited, plaintiffs were successful in defeating all appeals through the United States Supreme Court. Complex settlement negotiations are now underway involving the Government of the Republic of the Philippines, various Swiss Bank interests, and the Estate of Ferdinand E. Marcos.

Jury verdict for plaintiffs in Formby v. Bais, et al. tried by Randall H. Scarlett after rejecting a $125,000 settlement offer.

Plaintiff, William L. Formby suffered from sleep apnea. The defendant doctor sought to resolve plaintiff's condition through a "new" surgical process, which entailed the resection of part of plaintiff's soft palate.

At trial, it was established that the defendant doctor had breached the applicable standard of care through improper resection. The consequences altered plaintiff's speech and eating habits.

Despite defendant's contention that the amount of resection was a judgment call, and that he was clearly within the applicable standard of care, the verdict is thought to be one of the largest, if not the largest, medical malpractice awards in the Central Valley area of California.

In Atayde v. Miller, et al, Mr. Scarlett was appointed lead counsel in a coordinated action involving a multi-vehicle/truck accident taking place on one of the busier Bay Area freeways. Mr. Atayde was killed as a result of that accident, and was survived by his wife and children, Mr. Scarlett coordinated the action and after extensive settlement conferences, the matter was resolved without the need of trial.

"Settlement reached with third party defendants as well as with workers' compensation insurance fund. Plaintiff was working on a construction site when a piece of machinery caught plaintiff's shirt causing him to be thrown to the cement floor. Loss of consciousness was questioned. MRI Scan, CT Scan, and other neuro imaging all proved normal. Despite this, plaintiff remained unable to work, was prone to violent outbursts, disinhibition, and developed a seizure disorder.

After mediation, the settlement reached demonstrates the profound impact a brain injury can have. [Confidential.]"

In Herndon v. Parball Corp., dba Flamingo Hilton Hotel, et. al., plaintiffs Claude and Jill Herndon brought suit in the United States Federal District Court, District of Nevada (Las Vegas) when the stool upon which Mr. Herndon was sitting fell over due to a concealed hole in the floor of the casino (under the carpet). Mr. Herndon was projected forward and struck his head on the table before him. Defendants contested plaintiff's claim of loss of consciousness, and the emergency room records indicated that Mr. Herndon sustained only a slight bruise and headache. All imaging was negative, and defendants denied that the forces involved in the fall were sufficient to cause brain injury to Mr. Herndon. Compounding proof of injury difficulties, Mr. Herndon had a pre-existing seizure disorder, though counsel was able to establish that the fall caused seizures of a different type than those previously occurring. This extremely difficult case included defense allegations of pre-existing depression, and an extremely low pre-morbid vocational earnings history. Despite this, counsel was able to reach a substantial settlement for the Herndon's which recognized the strong probability of a jury recognizing that Mr. Herndon had indeed sustained a mild traumatic brain injury. Mr. Scarlett was assisted by co-counsel Cal Potter, Esq. In addition, the expert witnesses involved in the case, including a neuropsychologist, a physiatrist, a neurologist, a biomechanical engineer, a life care planner, a vocational rehabilitation specialist, and an economist, were essential witnesses establishing the true injuries suffered by Mr. Herndon as a result of the casino's negligence. A portion of the $2,900.000.00 settlement went to purchase an annuity, which is expected to pay out substantial additional funds over the course of plaintiffs life.

"Settlement was achieved as against two remaining defendants in this catastrophic personal injury/medical malpractice case. On March 28, 2000, plaintiff James DeVito underwent bilateral calf-implant procedure performed by defendant Robert Brink, M.D. This action involved certain health care providers who subsequently saw Mr. DeVito and allegedly failed to take prompt corrective action for his compartment syndrome."

To learn more about this case click here

Randall H. Scarlett was the sole trial counsel in Warfield v. Peninsula Golf and Country Club, San Mateo County Superior Court Action 258736; 10 Cal.4d 594.

The Peninsula Golf and County Club precluded Mary Ann Warfield from maintaining a proprietary membership in the Club on the basis of her gender. The Club contended that its by-laws prohibited women from holding a proprietary membership. (Mrs. Warfield had been awarded the club membership as part of a Property Settlement Agreement in the divorce with her husband. Mrs. Warfield was an avid golfer and had won the women's division club championship.)

After trial, Mr. Scarlett argued before the Court of Appeals, and ultimately, the California Supreme Court ruled in favor of plaintiff, thereby disallowing discrimination based on sex in certain clubs, even those purporting to be private. The Court's opinion is a strong precedent combating sexual discrimination in California.

Mr. Scarlett along with his co-counsel, Cal J. Potter III, Esq., obtained affirmative remedies as a result of the death of plaintiff's decedent, in addition to a monetary settlement. Banks v. North Las Vegas Police Department. This was a federal civil rights action involving medical monitoring and medical care provided inmates in a jail operated by North Las Vegas.

At the time of his arrest, and before, Mr. Banks was in need of immediate medical treatment and care. Instead of providing him such care, it was alleged that he had been the victim of the use of excessive force, and had been denied medical treatment and care. Ultimately, Mr. Banks died in jail.

Just prior to trial, Mr. Scarlett and his co-counsel, Cal J. Potter III, Esq., confidentially settled the case. The settlement terms did include a letter of apology from the Mayor of North Las Vegas and from the Chief of Police of North Las Vegas. Additionally, the jail agreed to hire and place in the jail an independent medical services company. Inmates were thereafter afforded medical screening and onsite medical care as a result.

In Harrison v. North Las Vegas, et al., Mr. Scarlett, together with his co-counsel Cal J. Potter III, Esq., again took on the correctional facility run by the City of North Las Vegas. This federal civil rights action was settled for a confidential amount.

On the day of his 32nd birthday, Mr. Harvey Harrison was on the way to his mother's house for breakfast. Somewhere along the way, it would appear Mr. Harrison was himself the victim of a crime, the attack leaving him with a closed head injury. Due to his appearance and behavior, the North Las Vegas police were called. Rather than provide Mr. Harrison the medical treatment he so desperately needed, the police officers transported Mr. Harrison to the North Las Vegas Detention Center.

Mr. Harrison was double handcuffed, restrained with leg irons, and thrown into a cell. Having been afforded no medical treatment nor medical screen, Mr. Harrison died twelve hours later as a result of complications from his closed head injuries.

Mr. Scarlett established that Mr. Harrison died when the jail failed to properly diagnose the pre-arrest traumatic brain injury. Based on the extensive pre-trial discovery conducted by Mr. Scarlett and his co-counsel, Cal J. Potter III, Esq., a confidential monetary settlement was reached. Following such settlement, the City of North Las Vegas again altered the structure of medical monitoring rendered on-site at the jail.

In 1989, Mr. Scarlett became involved in In Re Exxon Oil Spill Litigation, United States District Court, District of Alaska, Consolidated Action No. A89-095-CV (HRH). He remains an active member of the Plaintiffs' Coordinating Committee.

Mr. Scarlett represents approximately 750 individual direct action plaintiffs in this litigation, including fishing processing facilities, area businesses, tendermen, commercial fishermen, property owners, and cannery workers.

On April 13, 1994, the United States Federal District Judge H. Russell Holland issued Order No. 204 which appointed Mr. Scarlett as one of the trial lawyers on behalf of the mandatory punitive damage class. The punitive verdict rendered against Exxon was $5,000,000,000. While Mr. Scarlett did not try this case, he remains active in the litigation.

Judgments returned against Exxon exceed $5,000,000,000. The matter is currently on appeal and before the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

*Numerous other trial/settlement information available upon request.

Co-owners of an office building in San Francisco received a settlement of $4,125,000 against other co-owners who were managing the building involving fraud and misappropriation of monies. This case was handed by Mr. Scarlett and Mr. Ormiston. The settlement occurred through mediation at JAMS after disclosure of expert witnesses which included a former Real Estate Commissioner, real estate brokers, a forensic handwriting expert and two accounting firms.

Confidential settlement. Confidential settlement reached with defendants as a result of the wrongful death of plaintiff's father. Plaintiff was an adult, non-dependent child of decedent. Plaintiff's father died as a result of combined medical/malpractice products liability. Decedent was also survived by a spouse.

In Hall v. Lopez Brothers Trucking settlement was reached with defendant trucking company when plaintiff's vehicle was struck by run away truck. Plaintiff sustained a mild TBI, though plaintiff had normal x-rays and neuro-imaging. Plaintiff also suffered from a whip-lash during the accident. Policy limits were obtained.

Aaron Rivera sustained serious injuries when, due to a case of mistaken identity, police officers brutally pushed Mr. Rivera through a door and proceeded to strike him repetitively with their batons. Mr. Rivera sustained multiple subdural hematomas which required evacuation through a craniotomy. Fortunately, Mr. Rivera underwent a miraculous recovery. He sustained only about $3,000 in wage loss, though his medical bills were $50,000. The settlement, reached on the first day of trial is thought to be one of the highest involving the City of San Jose Police Department.

Settlement reached with defendant TRANSIT DISTRICT when plaintiff was rear-ended by a transit bus. Plaintiff sustained a mild TBI, though plaintiff had a ten-year pre-existing history of debilitating migraines. Plaintiff also suffered from a whiplash during the accident though all x-rays and neuro-imaging was negative. Case settled on second day of trial.

In Greener v. Hospital, et al., plaintiffs brought suit on behalf of their eight year old daughter as a result of a birth injury. Mrs. Greener was asymptomatic, though Beta Strep positive. It was alleged that defendants failed to give prophylactic antibiotics, and further, that defendant failed to appropriately diagnose plaintiff’s child with meningitis following birth.

Plaintiff’s child did develop meningitis. The child went on to develop learning disabilities as a result of the brain damage sustained at birth. The significant settlement resulting from this matter will provide funds throughout the child’s life, including funds for private education, neuropsychological treatment, and other care.

In Gadye v. Hospital, et al., Mr. Gadye alleged that due to substandard conduct in the prescription of prednisone, a steroid, Mr. Gadye developed bilateral avascular necrosis requiring knee replacements in both legs. This significant settlement provided Mr. Gadye (an asylum judge), with sufficient funds to cover his pain and suffering and future medical needs, including knee replacements.

Judgment was entered for $605, 556 for plaintiff, a passenger, in Gordon v. City and County of San Francisco against a MUNI Bus Driver for assault and battery. This case was handled by Mr. Ormiston. The MUNI bus driver pushed the passenger off the bus, fell on top of her and punched her several times. The passenger suffered bruises to the hip, back and head, but suffered no permanent injuries. A neurological exam and CT scan were normal. MUNI is also issuing a letter of apology.

A home owner received a $90,000 property damage/negligent repair work/mold contamination settlement against a plumbing company for negligent work which caused a black water loss and resultant mold contamination to her home. This case was handled by Mr. Ormiston. A first party liability case is still pending against the property owner's insurance company for recover of substantial additional monies involving this same loss.