Miller et al v. Juarez Cartel

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA
Howard J. Miller, et al., 	)
)
Plaintiffs, 	) 	FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS
) 	OF LAW AND ORDER FOR
vs. 	) 	JUDGMENT
)
Juarez Cartel, a/k/a Vincente Carillo 	)
Fuente Organization (a/k/a “CFO” ), 	) 	Case No. 1:20-cv-00132
a/k/a La Linea, 	)
)
Defendant. 	)
Background
On November 4, 2019, members of the Juárez Cartel (“Defendant” or “Cartel”) and its
violent armed wing, La Línea (“The Line”), ambushed three women and fourteen children,
murdering six of the children and their mothers in the Sierra Alta in Sonora, Mexico. All of the
people ambushed were United States citizens.
These calculated assaults occurred “approximately 90 miles”1 south of the United States-
Mexico border between the Mexican states of Sonora and Chihuahua. 2 	“Cartel assassins killed
Maria Rhonita LeBaron (“Rhonita” and/or “Nita”) and her four children, twelve-year-old [H.M.
Jr.], ten-year-old [K.B.M.], and eight-month-old twins [T.A.M.] and [T.G.M.]”3 Rhonita and her
four children were “alive and conscious”4 when their vehicle was “most definitely intentionally
set on fire.”5
1 Testimony of Kenneth Miller, Trial Transcript (“Tr.”) 37:3.
2 Testimony of Dayer LeBaron, Tr. 80:4-5.
3 Testimony of Enrique Baeza, Tr. 113:13-24.
4 Testimony of Dr. Sebastian Schubl, Tr. 158:17 (emphasis added).
5 Id. at Tr. 156:9 (emphasis added).
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 1 of 165

2
“The Cartel also killed Christina Langford (“Christina”) and Dawna Ray (“Dawna”) and
her two children – eleven-year-old [T.L.] and two-year-old [R.L.]” 6 Those injured in the attack
include F.M.J., K.L., D.L., M.L., C.L., J.L., X.L., and B.L.7
The Antiterrorism Act of 1990, 18 U.S.C. § 2331, et seq. (2022) and its amendments
provide criminal penalties for whoever unlawfully kills or engages in physical violence resulting
in serious bodily injury to a United States national. 18 U.S.C. § 2332 (2022). The Act provides
for criminal penalties and broad civil remedies for injured nationals, their estates, survivors and
heirs, in addition to criminal penalties. 18 U.S.C. § 2333(a). 	Here, family members, legal
guardians of injured minors, legal guardians of surviving minor children and siblings of victims,
and legal representatives of the estates of the nine victims killed brought claims under the civil
remedies provision of the Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2333(a).
Procedural History
The first case (the “Miller” case) arising out of the November 4, 2019, attack was filed on
July 23, 2020, including claims by Howard Miller (on his own behalf, on behalf of his wife
Rhonita’s estate, on behalf of the estates of his four children who were murdered, and on behalf of
his three surviving minor children), additional members of the Miller/LeBaron family, Tyler
Johnson (on his own behalf, on behalf of his wife Christina’s estate, and on behalf of his six
surviving minor children), additional members of the Johnson/Langford family, and members of
Dawna Ray’s family.8
The second case (the “Langford” case) arising out of the attack was filed on August 25,
2020, including claims by David Langford (on his own behalf, on behalf of the estates of his two
6 Testimony of Enrique Baeza, Tr. 113:13-24.
7 Testimony of K.L., Tr. 293:19-25; Testimony of Tyler Johnson, Tr. 372:1-7.
8 See ECF No. 1 (Complaint in the Miller action).
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 2 of 165

3
children who were murdered, and on behalf of his seven surviving minor children who were also
present during the attack – five of whom sustained gunshot wounds in the attack), the estate of
Dawna Ray and four adult children of Dawna Ray who assert solatium claims arising from the
attack in which their mother and nine of their siblings were involved.9 The Court consolidated the
Miller and Langford cases on October 16, 2020.10
Plaintiffs served the complaint by publication as provided by the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure. The Cartel failed to timely respond. Entry of Default was entered in the Miller case
on December 7, 2020 (ECF No. 22) and in the Langford case on December 31, 2020 (ECF No.
25).
The Court presided over a four-day bench trial starting February 7, 2022. 	Miller and
Langford Plaintiffs presented evidence the Defendant was responsible for inflicting injury and
killing occupants of the three vehicles. 	The attacks were conducted to intimidate and coerce
civilians and the government, and took place outside the territorial boundaries of the United States.
Evidence was presented as to the pain, suffering, and damages suffered by each Plaintiff as a result
of the Defendant’s acts.
Evidence was admitted from 1) Plaintiffs, including survivors of the attacks and family
members of the victims; 2) expert witness written reports and live expert testimony concerning
causes of death, pain and suffering damages, psychological injuries, economic and pecuniary
losses; 3) third-party witnesses including eyewitnesses to the attacks and behaviors of the
Plaintiffs; and 4) the prosecutor overseeing the Mexican Government’s criminal investigation into
the November 4, 2019 attacks. In addition, the Court accepted into evidence sworn affidavits from
Plaintiffs and fact witnesses.
9 See Complaint in the Langford action, Case No. 20-cv-00159.
10 See ECF No. 17.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 3 of 165

4
The court makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law:
I. 	FINDINGS OF FACT
A. Defendant
1. 	The Miller Complaint includes facts of the history and violent activities of the Defendant
from its origins in the 1980s (Miller Compl. at ¶40) to the attack on November 4, 2019.
The Complaint also includes factual quotes and citations to indictments including
confessions of known members of the Defendant Cartel.
2. 	The U.S. government in 2000 designated Vicente Carrillo Fuentes as a significant foreign
narcotics trafficker under the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Act.11
3. 	On June 1, 2004, the Carrillo Fuentes Organization (a/k/a CFO; a/k/a Juárez Cartel) was
listed as a significant foreign narcotics trafficker under the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin
Designation Act. 12
4. 	On December 15, 2021, the U.S. Department of the Treasury further clarified the scope of
designations against the Cartel to expressly incorporate an additional alias of the Juárez
Cartel, “La Línea”.13
5. 	“Throughout history … [the Mexican Government] had several events where La Línea has
attacked civilians like [in] this case. Public servants, former police, prosecutors, former
politicians. And … it is their signature or their habit[] to burn vehicles”.14
11 See U.S. Dep’t of the Treasury, Sanctions Pursuant to the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act (Last
Updated February 14, 2022), available at: https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/126/narco_sanctions_kingpin.pdf.
12 Recent OFAC Actions, Department of Treasury, June 1, 2004, Ex. 2.
13 Dep’t of the Treasury, Office of Foreign Assets Control; Notice of OFAC Sanctions Actions, 86 Fed. Reg. 72,307
(Dec. 21, 2021).
14 Testimony of Enrique Baeza, Tr. 114:8-12.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 4 of 165

5
6. 	The Cartel’s actions are intended “to intimidate civilians so that they don’t testify against
them. And also they intimidate public servants so that they don’t investigate” the Cartel for
its criminal activities.15
7. 	The Defendant’s objective “is to cause terror in people.”16
B. The November 4, 2019 Attack
8. 	The evidence shows that “100 heavily armed individuals had a meeting on November 3,
2019, at the ranch belonging to the leader of the criminal organization known as La Línea
or the Juárez Cartel.”17
9. 	“The main objective of this criminal organization was to take back the territory of Agua
Prieta which at that time belonged to the Sinaloa Cartel.” 18
10. “[A]ll 100 men were divided up into two groups – one group of approximately 60 was led
by GIL and a second group of approximately 40 was led by Tolteca.”19 “And this group of
about 40 individuals placed themselves in two strategic points: The first strategic point was
where the attack against Rhonita and her four minor children occurred, that was the vehicle
that was later set on fire and burnt; and the other strategic point was whe[re] the attack to
the other two vehicles occurred.”20 During th[e] planning process, “[t]he order was [given]
to shoot ... at anyone, be it a civilian, police officer, just anyone.” 21
11. The next day, November 4, Rhonita, Christina, Dawna, and their children created a three-
car caravan to travel the road from La Mora to their separate destinations.22
15 Id. at Tr. 114:18-21.
16 Id. at Tr. 115:11-12.
17 Id. at, Tr. 106:21-24.
18 Id. at Tr. 107:22-24.
19 Mexican Government Apostille 2, Ex. 4, at 000702.
20 Testimony of Enrique Baeza, Tr. 107:8-18.
21 Id. at Tr. 108:1-4.
22 Testimony of Kenneth Miller, Tr. 41:19-42:2.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 5 of 165

6
12. Rhonita and four of her children were traveling to Phoenix, Arizona to pick up her husband,
Howard Miller, at the airport.23 Howard had finished a month of work in the oil fields of
North Dakota and was traveling to Arizona to meet his wife and their four children to go
shopping and spend time together before returning to work in North Dakota. 24
13. Christina Langford, with her seven-month-old daughter F.M.J., traveled from Colonia
LeBaron to La Mora on November 2, 2019 to collect their passports to travel to the United
States.25 On November 4, 2019, Christina and F.M.J. were returning to Colonia LeBaron.
She planned to accompany Rhonita LeBaron to the main highway and then head to Colonia
LeBaron in Chihuahua, Mexico to meet her husband Tyler Johnson and their five other
children.26 Christina and Tyler planned to leave Colonia LeBaron with their six children
the following day and begin their family’s permanent move back to North Dakota.27
14. Dawna Ray also planned to accompany Rhonita to the main highway and then split off to
attend a family wedding in Colonia LeBaron.28
15. The caravan of vehicles began traveling from La Mora at approximately 9:30 a.m. on
November 4, 2019.29
16. In the first vehicle, a white 2014 Chevrolet Suburban LT30 , was Christina Langford and
her seven-month-old infant F.M.J.31
23 Id. at Tr. 41:19-20; Testimony of Howard Miller, Tr. 180:21.
24 Testimony of Howard Miller, Tr. 181:2-9.
25 Testimony of Tyler Johnson, Tr. 363:5-11.
26 Testimony of Kenneth Miller, Tr. 41:25 – 42:2.
27 Testimony of Tyler Johnson, Tr. 365:12-15.
28 Testimony of Kenneth Miller, Tr. 41:24; Testimony of K.L., Tr. 293:11-12.
29 Testimony of K.L. Tr. 294:4-6.
30 Mexican Government Apostille 2, Ex. 4 T_000154.
31 Testimony of Tyler Johnosn, Tr. 363:21.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 6 of 165

7
17. In the second vehicle, also a white Chevrolet Suburban32 , was Dawna Ray and nine of her
children – D.L., T.L., R.L., K.L., M.L., C.L., X.L., B.L., and J.L.33
18. In the third car, a black Chevrolet Suburban, was Maria Rhonita LeBaron and four of her
children – H.M. Jr., K.B.M, T.A.M, and T.G.M.34
19. Soon after departing, Rhonita’s vehicle broke down.35 Dawna helped get Rhonita and her
children back to La Mora, but Christina continued driving.36
20. After dropping Rhonita and the children back at La Mora, Dawna and her children got back
on the road to continue their journey to Colonia LeBaron.37
21. Rhonita spoke with Loretta Miller, her mother-in-law, who loaned Rhonita her Suburban
to continue her journey.38 She also asked her brother-in-law, Andre Miller, to assist her in
transferring the broken down vehicle back to La Mora.
22. Rhonita then returned to the broken-down vehicle to collect her belongings. Andre went
to pick up a trailer and find someone who could help him tow the broken-down vehicle
back to town. 39
23. Rhonita was driving the vehicle, H.M., Jr. was seated in the front passenger seat, the twins
T.A.M. and T.G.M. were in the second row of seats, and it appears that K.B.M. was seated
in the third row of seats in the back of the vehicle. 40
32 Mexican Government Apostille 2, Ex. 4 T_000154.
33 Testimony of K.L., Tr. 293:23-24
34 Id.
35 Declaration of Andre Miller, Ex. 55, at ¶ 7.
36 Id. at ¶ 5; Testimony of K.L., Tr. 294:9-12.
37 Testimony of K.L., Tr. 294:14-16.
38 Declaration of Andre Miller, Ex. 55, ¶ 8.
39 Id. at ¶ 11.
40 Testimony of Kenneth Miller, Tr. 47:24-48:6.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 7 of 165

8
C. Attack on Rhonita LeBaron and her Children
24. A few minutes up the road, Rhonita’s vehicle came under heavy gunfire from the first hit
team. 	For at least five to ten (5-10) minutes,41 assailants fired automatic and belt-fed
machine gun rounds into Rhonita and her children’s vehicle.42
25. Specifically, the Mexican Government catalogued 923 spent shell casings 43 —including
.223 caliber, 7.62x39 mm, .308 caliber and 50 mm shell casings44 —in the vicinity of where
Rhonita and her children were ambushed.
26. Casings were found “200 meters from the rear part [of Rhonita’s] vehicle and at the top of
the hill region”45 with the nearest point being “114.89 meters away.”46 These casings,
relative to the vehicle, were located “behind and to the left and right.” 47
27. These casings were shot by at least 23 different assault rifles48 and nine (9) of these
weapons have been linked by the Mexican Government to prior homicides and complex
assaults in Mexico.49
28. According to the Mexican Government’s forensic analysis, Rhonita’s vehicle was
impacted by 321 bullets.50
29. Dr. Sebastian Schubl, a trauma surgeon, burn expert, and the Director of Medical
Operations for the University of California-Irvine Health Administration, testified that he
41 Mexican Government Apostille 2, Ex. 4 T_000186.
42 See Mexican Government Apostilles 1 and 2, Exhibits 3B, 3C, 3D, 3E, 4B and 4C.
43 Mexican Government Apostille 2, Ex. 4 T_000153.
44 Id.
45 Mexican Government Apostille 1, Ex. 3 T_000133.
46 Mexican Government Apostille 1, Ex. 3 T_000135.
47 Mexican Government Apostille 1, Ex. 3 T_000221; see Ex. 3 T_000224 for illustrative purposes; Christina Langford
1006 Summary Chart, Ex. 12; Rhonita LeBaron 1006 Summary Chart, Ex. 13; Dawna Langford 1006 Summary Chart,
Ex. 14.
48 Mexican Government Apostille 2, Ex. 4 T_000039-40, 49-63.
49 Mexican Government Apostille 2, Ex. 4 T_000063.
50 Mexican Government Apostille 1, Ex. 3 T_000226-233; Rhonita LeBaron 1006 Summary Chart, Ex. 13_000001-
2.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 8 of 165

9
was “convinced … all four of the children and Rhonita probably survived the initial
assault.”51 When asked whether this was more probable than not, Dr. Schubl responded,
“Absolutely”, and he testified that he held this opinion to a reasonable degree of medical
certainty.52
30. At some point during the attack, H.M., Jr. tried to escape the vehicle. His car door was
found open, and his legs hung half-inside and half-outside of the passenger door.53
31. The evidence further bolsters Dr. Schubl’s opinion as it shows that H.M. Jr.’s sister,
K.B.M.’s remains were found in the rear of the vehicle laying on the floor in the fetal
position; a position she would not have been able to achieve had she been immediately
incapacitated by the fusillade of bullets.54
32. Cartel members approached the vehicle after the assault started and shot at it from closer
proximity as evidenced by the bullet casings located near and around the vehicle.55
33. Mexican authorities created still images of a video taken by the Cartel during the attack
and transcribed the video56 wherein members of the Cartel could be heard saying:
“(…)
Ah no
They already messed it/him up, for real, man
They're gonna finish it/him off, dude
No, man, they stayed
Look at him.
No, he's not gonna see anything
(unintelligible)
51 Testimony of Dr. Schubl, Tr. 154:14-17; see also Expert Report of Dr. Sebastian Schubl, Ex. 25_000023.
52 Testimony of Dr. Schubl, Tr. 154:18-23.
53 Testimony of Adrian LeBaron-Soto, Tr. 221:4-6; Ex. 25_000012; Declaration of Bathsheba Shalom Tucker, Ex.
37_000007, ¶ 43; Family Photos of Miller Family Remains, Ex. 17_000004,000012-14; Declaration of Andre Miller,
Ex. 55_000003, ¶ 14; Photos of Miller Family Remains taken by Douglas Johnson, Ex. 73_000005-8.
54 Testimony of Adrian LeBaron-Soto, Tr. 222:11-12; Testimony of Dr. Schubl, Tr. 154:11-12; Declaration of Adriana
Jones, Ex. 46_000005, ¶ 27; Family Photos of Miller Remains, Ex. 17_000003, 6, 7, 15; Family Photos of Miller
Family Remains, taken by Douglas Johnson, Ex. 73_000010-11.
55 Mexican Government Apostille 2, Ex. 4G; Declaration of Andre Miller, Ex. 55_000003, ¶ 14.
56 Testimony of Enrique Baeza, Tr. 109:3-8, 110:12-18; Mexican Government Apostille 2, Ex. 4_000535; Ex.
4_000594; Mexican Government Apostille 3, Ex. 5_000035.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 9 of 165

10
Shoot him, don’t assume
Burn it/her
(unintelligible)
Hey, don’t surround it/him, stop
OK, OK
(unintelligible)
This is really fucked up
(unintelligible)
Oh, shit
END OF AUDIO…” 57
34. Dr. Schubl offered his analysis of the still images and transcript of the video: “[T]here’s a
lot of information here that’s really relevant to the case at hand… [Y]ou can see that
downward angle. You can see the distance to the vehicle. You can see there’s a lot of cactus
and shrubbery in the way. So while there’s several attackers around the car, it would have
taken them quite some time to work their way down this steep incline and around this
greenery to get to where they’re standing. You can also, most importantly see that the
vehicle is intact. … [D]amaged severely, but it’s not on fire for sure. Several of the
attackers are standing right next to it. Many of them are carrying weapons; they’re
surrounding the vehicle, if you will. So this gives [an] understanding of both the time of
what happened when and also how long this entire attack took.” 58
35. The Cartel proceeded to “most definitely intentionally set [Rhonita’s vehicle] on fire.”59
36. “[T]here’s three potential ways the car could have been set on fire… [T]here’s the fuel tank
in the back; there’s the engine in the front. Both of those have combustible elements to
57 Mexican Government Apostille, Ex. 5 T_000035; see also Mexican Government Apostille 2, Ex. 4-G (still
photographs from video).
58 Testimony of Dr. Schubl, Tr. 155:9-23.
59 Testimony of Dr. Schubl, Tr. 156:9; Testimony of Enrique Baeza, Tr. 110:4-5 (“it was concluded [by the Mexican
Government] that the vehicle was [] burnt by the assassins.”).
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 10 of 165

11
them and then there’s obviously the third way which is someone intentionally douses the
vehicle in gasoline or kerosene and lights it on fire.”60
37. Plaintiffs also provided the expert testimony of Dayer LeBaron, Rhonita’s brother and also
a certified automotive technician with qualifications to render an opinion regarding the
source of the fire to Rhonita’s vehicle. His opinion was based on his years of experience
in diagnosing and determining the cause of fires in vehicles. 	He performed a visual
inspection of the vehicle and the area surrounding the vehicle at the site of the attack on
November 5, 2019, while the vehicle remained where it had been ambushed the day
before.61
38. Visual inspection of the engine compartment by Mr. LeBaron revealed “unburnt cardboard
on the air filter”, the “serpentine belt” wasn’t “completely burnt” and the “AC compressor,
the alternator, various components of the – that are aluminum similar to the rim[]s of
vehicle were still intact.”62
39. Mr. LeBaron concluded that “the fire did not originate from the engine compartment”, to
a “reasonable degree of technical certainty.”63
40. Based on his examination under the vehicle where the fuel tank was located, Mr. LeBaron
testified that while “[t]he fuel tank itself had melted away. … [T]he straps [to hold the fuel
tank in place] were still intact as if it was holding it [the fuel tank] and the tank just melted
away. … [T]he body above the fuel tank [also] didn’t receive any damage.” 64
60 Id. at 156:11-18.
61 Testimony of Dayer LeBaron, Tr. 83:23-84:4; Declaration of Dayer LeBaron, Ex. 29_000002, ¶¶10, 11.
62 Id. at Tr. 84:14-15-19.
63 Id. at Tr. 85:2-6.
64 Id. at 86:21-24, see also Declaration of Dayer LeBaron, Ex. 29_000003, ¶15.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 11 of 165

12
41. The video taken by Cartel members also demonstrates that as they approached the vehicle
following the hail of bullets, the vehicle was not on fire.65
42. Additionally, “you’re able to hear some voices saying ‘burn it’ and from the evidence
obtained, it was concluded that the vehicle was later burnt by the assassins.”66 This was
“not the first time that they [the Defendant] burn[ed] a vehicle because that is a signature
move from that criminal organization … La Línea.” 67
43. Rhonita, H.M. Jr., K.B.M., T.A.M., and T.G.M., “to a reasonable degree of medical
certainty”, “were all alive and conscious” when their vehicle was intentionally set on fire.68
44. Dr. Schubl testified that this is “arguably [] the worst way you can die.”69 He testified that
being just burned alive does not provide a:
real summary of what the terror these inhabitants of this car had to deal with
on that day. You have to look at it from the start to the finish of the entire
assault. So these assailants discharged 900-and-some rounds at the car.
Even if there were 20 or 30 of them, they were reloading multiple times and
emptying their weapons and reloading again. This stretched on for minutes,
many minutes. That … covers the car in bullet holes. The car can’t move
any more, the inhabitants are inside. They have total panic. They can’t get
out of the car because the attackers are right outside.
Then this group decides to wander down this hill, training their weapons at
the vehicle, shooting a video, surrounding the car, possibly shooting more.
That takes time just to get the 200 meters from the top of this steep incline
all the way down to the car. The family’s sitting there. They see these people
coming; they’re all carrying weapons. They know what’s going to happen.
After they surround the car …[t]hey get on the car. They douse the car….
[T]hey actually opened the door and threw the gasoline into the car. But,
again, you can’t escape because they’re surrounding your car and they have
guns, so stretching on for even longer. Think about as a parent what th[at]
feels like when your kids are in the back of this car. They’re hurt; they’re
scared. You’re hurt; you’re terrified, and there’s nothing you can do.
65 Id. at Tr. 86:23-87:-2.
66 Testimony of Enrique Baeza, Tr. 110:3-5.
67 Id. at Tr. 110:5-10.
68 Testimony of Dr. Schubl, Tr. 158:13-17; see also Expert Report of Dr. Schubl, Ex. 25_000023.
69 Id. at. Tr. 158:22.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 12 of 165

13
And then they set the car on fire. You’re talking about extreme heat. The
human body, unfortunately, is actually fairly resistant to burns. … [P]atients
sometimes [] have 90 or nearly 100 percent of their bodies burnt and they
still manage to make it to the hospital and some of them still manage to
make it through months in the burn ICU and survive. But that doesn’t mean
its painless. Certainly not. And in an enclosed space, if you can’t get the
person out, it’s even worse because the air becomes super heated and now
you’re breathing in fire. So not only are you burning from the outside,
you’re burning from the inside. The oxygen gets completely consumed. So
not only are you burning to death after being shot, but you’re also
suffocating. You’re asphyxiating because there’s no oxygen left in the air.
It’s just fire. So your sensation is intact. There’s nothing you can do. You
just hear and feel what’s going on around you.” 70
45. Dr. Schubl testified that, “if you start when the first bullet was shot until the last person in
that car took their last breath, that must have been close to an hour, maybe, 45 minutes of
just total terror. And as they’re sitting in that car burning to death, watching their siblings,
their family members burn to death, it’s – it must be the most frightening thing that anyone
has ever experienced.”71
D. Attack on Christina Langford and her Daughter
46. “14 kilometers and 700 meters north” of the attack on Rhonita’s vehicle,72 Christina’s
vehicle was attacked by a separate group of members of the Cartel.
47. Mexican authorities located 327 spent shell casings73 —including .223 caliber and 7.62x39
mm caliber shell casings74 —136-139 meters75 “ahead and to the right”76 of Christina’s
vehicle.
70 Id. at Tr. 158:23 -160:16 (emphasis added).
71 Id. at Tr. 160:22-161:3; see also Expert Report of Dr. Schubl Ex. 25_000024.
72 Mexican Government Apostille 1, Ex. 3 T_000133.
73 Mexican Government Apostille 2, Ex. 4 T_000155; Christina Langford 1006 Summary Chart, Ex. 12_000001-2.
74 Mexican Government Apostille 2, Ex. 4 T_000155; Christina Langford 1006 Summary Chart, Ex. 12_000001-2.
75 Mexican Government Apostille 1, Ex. 3 T_000136; Christina Langford 1006 Summary Chart, Ex. 12_000001-2.
76 Mexican Government Apostille 1, Ex. 3 T_000220; Christina Langford 1006 Summary Chart, Ex. 12_000001-2.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 13 of 165

14
48. However, the number of casings shot, as reported by Mexican authorities, does not
encapsulate the true and total number as family members have reported that they continue,
to this day, to find spent shell casings on the mountainside.77
49. Christina’s vehicle was impacted by 41 bullets78 shot from a “leftward, downward, and
backward”79 angle.
50. In spite of the heavy gunfire, Dr. Schubl testified there is “no doubt whatsoever that
Christina survived th[is] initial hail of bullets, the hundreds of rounds that were discharged
at her vehicle.”80
51. At this point, according to Mr. Baeza—the lead Mexican prosecutor—the Defendant could
tell it was attacking innocent women and children because Christina “stepped out of her
vehicle with her hands up in the air saying that there [sic] were women and children and
asking for them not to shoot, but still the assassins shot and killed her.”81
52. Additionally, Plaintiff Adrian LeBaron-Soto testified that he had walked up to the place
where the shots were fired, and one could “unmistakabl[y]” tell from the Cartel’s firing
positions that it was 1) firing upon women and children and 2) could even see Christina’s
hair color.82
77 Testimony of Tyler Johnson, Tr. 374:5-7; Christina Langford 1006 Summary Chart, Exhibit 12_000001-2; Dawna
Ray 1006 Summary Chart, Ex. 13_000001-2; Rhonita LeBaron 1006 Summary Chart, Ex. 14_000001-2.
78 Mexican Government Apostille 1, Ex. 3 T_000227-28.
79 Id. at 000215.
80 Testimony of Dr. Schubl, Tr. 148:8-10; see also Expert Report of Dr. Schubl, Ex. 25_000007.
81 Testimony of Enrique Baeza, Tr. 112:11-21.
82 Testimony of Adrian LeBaron-Soto, Tr. 228:16 – 229:3.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 14 of 165

15
53. Christina sustained four gunshot wounds. 83 One of those shots was “in the right pectoral
of 2x2cm with exit in posterior face of the back of .5x1cm”84 , which ultimately caused her
death, but the shot was not “immediately lethal.”85
54. Dr. Schubl testified that Christina “probably laid down or crawled for some minutes after
that and then was probably conscious for at least 10 or 15 minutes more, if not longer.” 86
55. Dr. Schubl further testified that one must:
put the timeline together again. It takes a long time to fire that many rounds
even from a large group; so the terror must have set in instantaneously.
Compounding that, of course, is the fact that her 7-month-old child is right
behind her, subject to the same assault. People when they’re shot, obviously
it’s incredibly painful.
There’s this concept of the “thousand-yard stare,” sort of this concept of
doom[.] … It’s almost instinctive panic that sets in because you know that
you’ve been lethally or nearly lethally injured. You’re bleeding internally.
Your heart’s racing. You’re emotionally overloaded. You’re terrified and
then, of course, that then compounds itself over time as it becomes more
and more clear that no one’s coming to help.87
56. Christina was traveling with her 7-month old baby, F.M.J., at the time.88 Photographic
evidence demonstrated that the base of her car seat sustained three gunshots.89
57. F.M.J. survived “but barely… [S]he was [found] strapped into a car seat alone with her
mother dead outside the car[,] … severely dehydrated”90 with “a tiny drop of blood on the
top of her head … as if one of the bullets or a piece of plastic from the car seat or something
where the bullet had whizzed past had nicked the very top of her head.”91
83 Testimony of Dr. Schubl, Tr. 146:20-25; Mexican Government Apostille 1, Ex. 3 T_000009-10.
84 Mexican Government Apostille 4, Ex. 70 T_000010. See also Expert Report of Dr. Schubl, Ex. 25_000007
(photograph of Christina’s body at scene).
85 Testimony of Dr. Schubl, Tr. 148:14; see also Family Photos of Christina Langford Attack Scene, Ex. 20.
86 Id. at Tr. 148:14-17.
87 Id. at Tr. 149:1-18.
88 Testimony of Tyler Johnson, Tr. 363:21.
89 Testimony of Tyler Johnson, Tr. 371:11-22, Photo of F.M.J. Car Seat, Taken by Tyler Johnson, Ex. 11; Testimony
of Dr. Schubl, Tr. 149:19-25, 150:1-5;.
90 Testimony of Dr. Schubl, Tr. 150:7-10.
91 Testimony of Amelia Sedgwick, Tr. 253:9-13.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 15 of 165

16
E. Attack on Dawna Ray and her Children
58. Shortly after the attack on Christina concluded, Dawna and her children reached the
location of Christina’s bullet-ridden vehicle. They saw Christina lying prone on the
ground. 92 Dawna sped up to assist Christina, but before she could reach Christina, the
Cartel began firing at Dawna’s vehicle. 93 Dawna panicked, yelling to her children to “duck
down” and to “get low.” 94 K.L., who was holding her two-year old baby brother R.L.,
attempted to protect him by pushing him underneath the seat.95 D.L. acted to protect his
siblings, but he could not save T.L.96
59. Dawna witnessed her son T.L. die from a gunshot wound to his skull.97 Shortly after,
Dawna was shot and killed by the Cartel.98
60. After the shooting stopped, men wearing black camouflage suits and carrying guns walked
down the mountain towards the surviving children—K.L., D.L., M.L., C.L., J.L., X.L., and
B.L. 99 The men opened the vehicle door and pointed a gun at K.L. 100 While staring down
the barrel of a gun, K.L. thought, “this is it.”101 The men ordered the children to exit the
vehicle despite the fact that many of the children had suffered grievous bullet wounds.102
A bullet had ripped through K.L.’s foot. 103 M.L. suffered a bullet wound to the forearm,
causing her to lose control of her fingers.104 C.L. suffered a gaping gunshot wound to his
92 Testimony of K.L., Tr. 294:22-24.
93 Testimony of K.L., Tr. 295:11.
94 Id. at 295:11-12.
95 Id. at Tr. 294:19-20; Expert Report of Dr. Schubl, Ex. 25_000009.
96 Testimony of D.L., Tr. 307:12-15.
97 Testimony of K.L., Tr. 295:21-22; Expert Report of Dr. Schubl, Ex. 25_000009, 000794-95
98 Id.
99 Testimony of K.L., Tr. 296:6-12.
100 Testimony of K.L., Tr. 296:14-15; Testimony of D.L., Tr. 308:15-17
101 Testimony of K.L., Tr. 296:17-18.
102 Id. at Tr. 296-97:20-7.
103 Id. at Tr. 297: 3-4.
104 Id. at Tr. 297:3-4.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 16 of 165

17
jaw, exposing the bone, and multiple gunshot wounds in his legs.105 X.L. suffered a large
exit wound on his shoulder, fracturing his shoulder and exposing muscle.106 B.L. suffered
a deep laceration across his chest, exposing his muscle, and a wrist fracture.107
61. When K.L. began gathering her siblings to exit the vehicle, she realized that R.L. had
succumbed to his gunshot wounds. 108 After the cartel members departed, the seven
surviving children attempted to walk down the mountainous and rugged road to La
Mora.109
62. None of the children were wearing jackets, and many of the children were barefoot. It was
“really cold”.110 The children did not have any food or medical supplies to tend to their
bleeding wounds.111 The children found only a pillow to help stanch the bleeding from the
gunshot wound to C.L.’s jaw. 112
63. Despite the gunshot wound to her foot, K.L. carried B.L down the mountain, while D.L.
carried C.L.113 When X.L. could not walk any farther, K.L. carried both X.L. and B.L.114
After carrying two siblings down the mountain for 20 minutes, K.L. could not continue.115
D.L. volunteered to trek the remaining eight miles to La Mora to get help from his family
members.116 D.L. ran down the road, dodging shooters who were firing at him, slowing
his progress.117 D.L. heard the gunshots and saw the dust spray in the dirt around him as
105 Id. at Tr. 297:3-4; Supplemental Declaration of David Langford, Ex. 72, p. 1-6.
106 Id.
107 Id. at Tr. 297:3-4; Supplemental Declaration of David Langford, Ex. 72, p. 7-8, 43.
108 Id. at Tr. 296:23-25.
109 Id. at Tr. 297:13-15; Testimony of Kenneth Miller, Tr. 44:25-45:2.
110 Testimony of K.L., Tr. 298:7-10.
111 Id. at 298-99:24-3, 299:10-13.
112 Testimony of D.L., Tr. 310:16-18.
113 Testimony of K.L., Tr. 297:13-15.
114 Id. at 297-98:25-4.
115 Id. at 298:1-4.
116 Testimony of D.L., Tr. 310:24-311:2; Testimony of Kenneth Miller, Tr. 59:6-9.
117 Testimony of D.L., Tr. 312:23-313:8.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 17 of 165

18
he ran. D.L. followed a wash down the mountain and eventually reached a highway near
La Mora where a family member spotted him.118
64. As the sun set and the temperatures dropped, help had not arrived.119 Fearing D.L. dead,
K.L. allowed M.L. to walk the remaining distance to La Mora for help.120 M.L. lost her
way in the dark and was later found walking alone in the desert along an old road to
Bavispe.121
65. The children waited for help, terrified the cartel would return to kill them.122 All the
children were thirsty and hungry, and B.L. cried for his bottle.123
66. Family members and David Langford finally convinced a local military unit to escort them
to the location of the attacks, to try to rescue the children.124 More than ten hours after the
attack, the military convoy located the children, and ambulances transported the children
to a local hospital in Bavispe.125 Realizing the children required medical treatment in the
United States, the military arranged for helicopter transport to the border.126 Three hours
later, most of the children had arrived at a hospital in Tucson, Arizona, except K.L. who
had been separated from her family near the border and transported to a different
hospital.127 K.L. was eventually reunited with her family at the hospital in Tucson.128
67. At the hospital, C.L.’s injuries required seven surgeries to address the reconstruction of his
jaw, the puncture wound on his left leg, the puncture wound on his right chest, the puncture
118 Id. at 313:11-23.
119 Id. at 298:7-20.
120 Id. at 298:18-23.
121 Testimony of Kenneth Miller, Tr. 62:10-24.
122 Testimony of K.L., Tr. 299:16-17.
123 Id. at Tr. 299:1-2.
124 Testimony of David Langford, Tr. 332-33:16-5.
125 Id. at Tr. 334:9-23; 338:25-339:14.
126 Id. at Tr. 339:14-22.
127 Id. at Tr. 341:15-342:21.
128 Id. at Tr. 342: 11-12.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 18 of 165

19
wound on his right forearm, and the 6 x 8 centimeter wound on his right leg.129 C.L.
remained at the hospital for approximately two months to allow his wounds to heal.130 If
C.L.’s missing jawbone regrows, C.L. may undergo a future surgery to replace the teeth he
lost from the gunshot wound. 131 Even after his release, C.L. used a wheelchair and attended
physical therapy to regain his ability to walk, albeit with a limp.132
68. X.L. underwent surgery to close the two-inch diameter wound on his left shoulder.133
69. B.L. arrived at the hospital and was diagnosed with anemia due to acute blood loss.134 To
address his bleeding, B.L. received sutures to close the six-centimeter laceration across his
chest and treatment for his fractured wrist.135
70. Doctors cleaned and bandaged K.L.’s and M.L.’s gunshot wounds, which have improved
over time.136
II. 	CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
A. The Court Has Jurisdiction Over Defendants and Claims
71. The entry of a default judgment is “committed to a district court’s discretion.”137 While
the Eighth Circuit has determined that “there is a ‘judicial preference for adjudication on
the merits,’” here the grounds for default are not in doubt. 138
129 Id. at Tr. 343-44:22-25; Declaration of C.L., Ex. 64; Supplemental Declaration of David Langford, Ex. 72 at ¶70.
130 Id. at Tr. 347:6-9.
131 Id. at Tr. 347:10-15.
132 Id. at Tr. 349:23-25; Declaration of C.L., Ex. 64.
133 Id. at Tr. 346:4-18; Supplemental Declaration of David Langford, Ex. 72, p. 211.
134 Supplemental Declaration of David Langford, Ex. 72, at 29.
135 Testimony of David Langford, Tr. 346:21-24; Supplemental Declaration of David Langford, Ex. 72, at 26.
136 Id. at Tr. 345:1-23; Supplemental Declaration of David Langford, Ex. 72, at 147, 158.
137 Nuevos Destinos, LLC v. Peck, Case No. 3:19-cv-00045, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 207509, at *2 (D.N.D. Mar. 10,
2020), citing United States ex. rel. Time Equip. Rental & Sales, Inc. v. Harre, 983 F.2d 128, 130 (8th Cir. 1993).
138 See Belcourt Pub. Sch. Dist. v. Herman, 786 F.3d 653, 661 (8th Cir. 2015), quoting Johnson v. Dayton Electric
Mfg. Co., 140 F.3d 781, 784 (8th Cir. 1998); see also Briarpatch Ltd., L.P. v. Geisler Roberdeau, Inc., 513 F. Supp.
2d 1, 3 (S.D.N.Y. 2007) (quoted in Belcourt for the principle that one of the factors to be considered in entering a
default judgment includes “whether the grounds for default are clearly established or are in doubt”).
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 19 of 165

20
72. As part of the analysis, “a district court has an affirmative duty to assure itself of
jurisdiction over the case and the defendants” prior to entering a default judgment.139
Nevertheless, “upon default, the factual allegations of a complaint (except those relating to
the amount of damages) are taken as true.”140
73. “In evaluating plaintiffs’ proofs, a court may accept as true plaintiffs’ uncontroverted
evidence, which may take the form of sworn affidavits or prior transcripts. Such evidence
may also include judicial notice of the evidence.”141
1. 	Personal Jurisdiction and Venue
74. The procedural requirement of service of a summons must be satisfied before a federal
court may exercise personal jurisdiction over a defendant.142
75. The ATA provides that service of process may be effected “in any district where the
defendant resides, is found, or has an agent.”143 Given the Defendant does not reside in any
district within the United States, the Miller Plaintiffs sought leave to serve Defendant by
publication under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(f)(3).144 The Langford Plaintiffs also moved for leave
to serve by publication.145
76. “[T]he personal jurisdiction issue in this case is not novel; several courts have faced similar
facts. 	These courts have held that the Due Process Clause’s ‘minimum contacts’
139 Nuevos Destinos, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 207509, at *2.
140 Murray v. Lene, 595 F.3d 868, 871 (8th Cir. 2010).
141 Flanagan v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 87 F.Supp.3d 93, 115 (D.D.C. 2015) (internal citation and quotations
omitted).
142 Omni Capital Int’l Ltd. V. Rudolf Wolff & Co., Ltd., 484 U.S. 97, 104 (1987).
143 18 U.S.C. § 2334(a).
144 See ECF No. 11.
145 See ECF No. 18.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 20 of 165

21
requirement for personal jurisdiction is met when terrorists ‘engage[] in unabashedly
malignant actions directed at [and] felt in’ the forum.”146
77. The court in Morris v. Khadr held that Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(k)(2) “establishes the court’s
jurisdiction.” 147 Rule 4(k)(2) states:
If the exercise of jurisdiction is consistent with the Constitution and laws of
the United States, serving a summons or filing a waiver of service is also
effective, with respect to claims arising under federal law, to establish
personal jurisdiction over the person of any defendant who is not subject to
the jurisdiction of the courts of general jurisdiction of any state.148
78. The D.C. Circuit in Mwani interpreted Rule 4(k)(2) to “permit[] a federal court to exercise
personal jurisdiction over a defendant (1) for a claim arising under federal law, (2) where
a summons has been served, (3) if the defendant is not subject to the jurisdiction of any
single state court, (4) provided that the exercise of federal jurisdiction is consistent with
the Constitution (and laws) of the United States.”149
79. As in this case, the court in Morris determined that in a case arising under the ATA where
service by publication was authorized and completed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(f), then the
first two prongs in the Mwani analysis of Rule 4(k)(2) have been satisfied.150 	Like the
defendant in Morris, the Defendant here is not subject to the jurisdiction of any single state
court.151 The Rule allows a court to exercise personal jurisdiction over a defendant with
sufficient contacts with the United States generally but lacks contacts with any one state.152
For the Rule to apply, there must be a federal claim, personal jurisdiction must not exist
146 Morris v. Khadr, 415 F. Supp. 2d 1323, 1334 (D. Utah 2006); see also Mwani v. Bin Laden, 417 F.3d 1, 12-13
(D.C. Cir. 2005).
147 Morris, 415 F. Supp. 2d at 1334.
148 Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(k)(2).
149 Mwani, 417 F.3d at 10.
150 See Morris, 415 F. Supp. 2d at 1335.
151 See ECF No. 11 at 2 (“The Juárez Cartel has no known address and operates as a clandestine criminal organization
in and around Chihuahua, Mexico”).
152 F.R.C.P. 4(k)(2) (advisory committee’s note).
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 21 of 165

22
over the defendant in any state, and the defendant must have sufficient contacts with the
United States as a whole so that the exercise of jurisdiction does not violate Fifth
Amendment due process. 153
80. The question of personal jurisdiction then turns upon whether the exercise of personal
jurisdiction in these circumstances meets the requirement that the Defendant has sufficient
contacts with the United States as a whole to justify the exercise of personal jurisdiction
under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.154
81. Here, this Court has “a ‘manifest interest’ in providing its residents with a convenient
forum for redressing injuries inflicted by out-of-state actors.”155
82. “Because injury in the United States undeniably is a foreseeable effect of a terrorist attack
purposefully directed at this country’s citizens, terrorism inherently is the sort of ‘conduct
and connection with’ the United States that should cause a foreign terrorist to ‘reasonably
anticipate being haled into court’ here.”156
83. Here, numerous Plaintiffs reside in North Dakota, or were residing in North Dakota at the
time of the massacre, causing the impact of the terrorist attack to be felt in the United States
as a whole, and in North Dakota specifically.157 For example:
a. 	Howard Miller, the husband of Rhonita, currently resides in Williston, North
Dakota with his children T.M., A.M., and Z.M. 158 He also was working in North
Dakota at the time of the attack.159
153 Nuevo Destinos, LLC, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 207313 at *25.
154 See Id.
155 Burger King v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462, 473 (1985).
156 Morris, 415 F. Supp. 2d at 1336, quoting World-Wide Volkswagen Corp v. Woodson, 444 U.S. 286, 297 (1980).
157 See ECF No. 1 at ¶¶ 1, 2, 4-6, 10, 19, 22-27, 29-32.
158 Testimony of Howard Miller, Tr. 161:25-162:1
159 Id. at Tr. 180:19-181:4
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 22 of 165

23
b. 	Estates have been opened in North Dakota for the Estates of Rhonita LeBaron,
H.M. Jr., K.B.M., T.G.M., and T.A.M. 160 	Howard was appointed Personal
Representative of all of the estates.161
c. 	Tyler Johnson, the husband of Christina, was preparing to move his entire family
to North Dakota at the time of the attack.162 	At the time of filing, Tyler and his
children F.M.J., C.C.J., J.T.J., T.E.J., H.J.J, and E.D.J. all resided in North
Dakota.163
d. 	An estate has also been opened in North Dakota for the Estate of Christina
Langford.164 Tyler Johnson was appointed Personal Representative of her estate.165
e. 	Additionally, at the time of filing the complaint, Isaac Langford, E.L., Serina
Langford and Elizabeth Langford resided in North Dakota.166
f. 	Ruthila LeBaron, a sibling of Rhonita, is a resident of North Dakota.167
g. 	Estates have been opened for Dawna, T.L., and R.L. in North Dakota.168 Crystal
Langford is the Personal Representative of Dawna’s estate, and David Langford is
the Personal Representative of T.L.’s and R.L.’s estates.169
h. 	Amber Ray, Dawna’s sister, splits her time between Mexico and North Dakota
because 	her 	husband 	has 	worked 	in 	Fargo, 	Williston, 	Grand 	Forks, 	and
Dickinson.170
160 Declaration of Howard Miller, Ex. 30_000023-27.
161 Id.
162 Testimony of Tyler Johnson, Tr. 362:3-14.
163 Miller Compl. ¶¶ 19, 22-27.
164 Declaration of Tyler Johnson, Ex. 31_000016.
165 Id.
166 Miller Compl. ¶¶ 29-32; Declaration of Isaac Langford, Ex. 35, ¶ 2.
167 Declaration of Ruthila LeBaron, Ex. 44_000001, ¶ 2.
168 Supplemental Declaration of David Langford, Ex. 72, at 18-21; ECF No. 40, Ex. 9.
169 Id.
170 Declaration of Amber Ray, Ex. 54_000001, ¶ 2.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 23 of 165

24
84. These claims arise under federal law and the Juárez Cartel is not subject to general
jurisdiction of any one state. As such, Rule 4(k)(2) allows the aggregation of nationwide
contacts to allow for service of process because the Plaintiffs’ claims arise under federal
law and the assertion of personal jurisdiction by this Court over the Defendant comports
with the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.
85. Based on Plaintiffs’ representations, this Court granted Plaintiffs’ motion for leave to serve
by publication finding “there is good cause to authorize service by publication given the
particular circumstances in this case.”171
86. Plaintiffs served the Defendant by publication in Mexico, serving the Defendant in the
country where it operates.172
87. Proof of service by publication was provided.173
88. On motion, the Clerk of the Court entered default judgments.174
89. Numerous Plaintiffs reside and work in North Dakota. The venue provision of the ATA
provides:
Any civil action under section 2333 of this title against any person may be
instituted in the district court of the United States for any district where any
plaintiff resides or where any defendant resides or is served, or has an agent.
Process in such a civil action may be served in any district where the
defendant resides, is found, or has an agent.175
Therefore, the United States District Court for the District of North Dakota is a proper
venue.
171 See ECF No. 14 at 2-3 (Miller case); ECF No. 19 (Langford case).
172 See ECF No. 20 (Miller case); ECF No. 24 (Langford case).
173 See Id.
174 See ECF No. 22 (Miller case); ECF No. 25 (Langford case).
175 18 U.S.C. § 2334(a).
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 24 of 165

25
2. 	Subject Matter Jurisdiction
90. Plaintiffs’ claims arise under both federal law and state law, so subject matter jurisdiction
is asserted under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 (federal-question jurisdiction) and 1367 (supplemental
jurisdiction). Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2338, the district courts of the United States have
exclusive jurisdiction over actions arising under 18 U.S.C. § 2333(a), the civil-damages
provision of the Antiterrorism Act.
91. The ATA grants United States nationals a private right of action for injury caused by an
act of international terrorism.176
92. Section 2333(a) states:
Any national of the United States injured in his or her person, property, or
business by reason of an act of international terrorism, or his or her estate,
survivors, or heirs, may sure therefor any appropriate district court of the
United States and shall recover threefold the damages he or she sustains and
the cost of the suit, including attorney’s fees.177
a. 	Standing
93. To assert standing under 18 U.S.C. § 2333(a), Plaintiffs must demonstrate they were United
States nationals at the time of the injury or that they are the “estate, survivor[], or heir[]”
of a United States national who was injured by reason of an act of international terrorism.
94. All victims murdered or injured during the November 4, 2019, massacre and their estates,
survivors, and/or heirs in this case, aside from Plaintiff Adrian LeBaron-Soto, are or were
United States citizens on November 4, 2019. 178
176 See 18 U.S.C. § 2333(a); Kaplan v. Lebanese Canadian Bank, SAL, 999 F.3d 842, 846 (2d Cir. 2021); see also
Morris, 415 F. Supp. 2d at 1327 (“In 18 U.S.C. § 2333, Congress created a cause of action for United States nationals
who were injured by ‘terrorism that occurred in a foreign country’”).
177 18 U.S.C. § 2333(a).
178 Passports of Amelia Sedgwick’s Children, Ex. 15: Isaac Langford (15_000001), Serina Langford (15_000002),
E.L. (15_000003), Elizabeth Langford (15_000004); Passports of Karen Woolley’s Children, Ex. 16: Kerah Ray
(16_000001), James Ray (16_000002), 	Jaremy Ray (16_000003), Jonathan Ray (16_000004), Amber Ray
(16_000005), Justin Ray (16_000006); Declaration of Howard Miller, Ex. 30: Howard Miller (30_000013), H.M. Jr.
(30_000015), K.B.M. (30_000016), T.M. (30_000017), A.M. (30_000018), Z.M. (30_000019), T.A.M. (30_000020),
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 25 of 165

26
95. Although Plaintiff Adrian LeBaron-Soto is not a United States citizen, he also has standing
under the ATA because “18 U.S.C. § 2333(a) contains no requirement that the survivors
or heirs of a United States national killed by an act of international terrorism must
themselves be citizens of the United States” to hold otherwise “would undermine the
ATA’s broad remedial purpose to grant a remedy to U.S. nationals and their families who
suffered from injury to an individual or property as a result of international terrorism.”179
b. 	These Attacks Constituted Acts of International Terrorism
96. For an act to be considered international terrorism, the event must meet the definition
provided in 18 U.S.C. § 2331(1). The term “international terrorism” is defined as:
…activities that--
(A) involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a
violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State, or
that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction
of the United States or of any State;
(B) appear to be intended--
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or
coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction,
assassination, or kidnapping; and
T.G.M. (30_000021); Declaration of Tyler Johnson, Ex. 31: Tyler Johnson (31_000011), C.J. (31_000018), J.J.
(31_000019), T.J. (31_000020), H.J. (31_000021), E.J. (Ex. 31_000022), F.M.J. (31_000023); Declaration of Amelia
Sedgwick (Ex. 32_000012); Declaration of Adrian LeBaron-Soto (Ex. 36: Maria Rhonita LeBaron (36_000011));
Declaration of Bathsheba Shalom Tucker (Ex. 37_000011); Declaration of Matthew LeBaron (Ex. 38_000006);
Declaration of Laura Corina LeBaron (Ex. 39_000006); Declaration of Miguel LeBaron (Ex. 40_000007); Declaration
of William LeBaron 	(Ex. 41_000006); Declaration of Javier LeBaron (Ex. 36_000022); Declaration of Dayer
LeBaron (Ex. 43_000007); Declaration of Ruthila LeBaron (Ex. 44_000006); Declaration of Melissa Conklin
(Ex.45_000006); Declaration of Adriana Jones (Ex. 46_000012); Declaration of Rholena Lian Johnson (Ex.
47_000010); Declaration of Karen Woolley (Ex. 48_000008). See also Testimony of Karen Woolley, Tr. 265:15 (all
of Karen Woolley’s children, Dawna Ray included, are United states citizens); Testimony of Amelia Sedgwick, Tr.
235:16 (all of Amelia Sedgwick’s children, Christina Langford included, are United States citizens.
179 Estate of Henkin v. Kuveyt Turk Katilim Bankasi, A.S., 495 F. Supp. 3d 144, l53 (E.D.N.Y. 2020) (internal citations
and quotations omitted).
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 26 of 165

27
(C) occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States, or transcend
national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons
they appear intended to intimidate or coerce, or the locale in which their perpetrators
operate or seek asylum.
97. Plaintiffs “must prove that the defendant’s act not only violated United States law or a State
law…, but that the act ‘also involve[d] violence of endanger[ed] human life,’ and “[f]urther
… appear[ed] to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population or to influence
or affect a government.”180
98. When considering whether the Defendant “appeared to have intended its activities to
intimidate or coerce [it] is not a question of the defendant’s subjective intent but rather a
question of what its intent objectively appeared to be.” 181
(1) Violation of the Criminal Laws of the U.S. or of any State
99. The murders of Christina, Rhonita, Dawna, T.L., R.L., H.M. Jr., K.B.M., T.A.M., and
T.G.M violate the laws of the United States and of North Dakota.182
100. 	The cause of death for Rhonita, H.M. Jr., K.B.M., T.A.M., and T.G.M. was
“calcination by direct exposure to fire,”183 or, as explained by Dr. Schubl—they “burn[ed]
to death, watching their sibling, their family members burn to death” in what “must be the
most frightening thing that anyone has ever experienced.”184
101. 	Christina’s cause of death was “death caused by wounds from projectiles fired by
firearms,”185 or, in layman terms, bullet wounds.
180 See Weiss v. Nat’l Westminster Bank, 993 F.3d 144, 160-61 (2d Cir. 2021), quoting Linde v. Arab Bank, PLC, 882
F.3d 314, 326 (2d Cir. 2018).
181 See Id. at 161 (internal citation and quotation omitted) (emphasis added)
182 See 18 U.S.C. § 1111; N.D.C.C. 12.1-16-01.
183 Mexican Government Apostille 4, Ex. 70 T_000002, 4, 6, 8, 16.
184 Testimony of Dr. Schubl, Tr. 160:25 – 161:3.
185 Mexican Government Apostille 4, Ex. 70 T_000010.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 27 of 165

28
102. 	F.M.J. was also injured in the attack.186 She was present, witnessed the attack, was
within the zone of danger of the attack, and has suffered emotional injury as a result of the
attack.187
103. 	The Cartel engaged in conduct which, in fact, constitutes a substantial step toward
the murder of F.M.J., K.L. D.L., M.L., C.L., J.L., X.L., and B.L. in violation of the laws of
the United States and North Dakota.188
104. 	The three attacks violate the laws of the United States and of North Dakota, as well
as endangered human life.
(2) Appears to be Intended to Intimidate, Coerce, Influence, or Affect
105. 	“Whether a defendant ‘appear[ed]’ to have intended its activities to intimidate or
coerce is not a question of the defendant’s subjective intent but rather a question of what
its intent objectively appeared to be.”189
106. 	The history of Defendant set forth in the Miller Complaint demonstrates the
objective intentions of the Defendant.190 	The Defendant has engaged in decades-long
attacks to intimidate civilians and government personnel. 	The violent attacks have
included mass killings.191 	Often, Defendant couples its murders with grotesque acts of
violence such as decapitation and mutilation.192 The Cartel has “bombed police and
military targets, kidnapped and assassinated political figures, journalists, criminal justice
advocates, religious figures, doctors.” 193 “In many instances, they have placed corpses in
186 See Testimoy of Dr. Schubl, Tr. 150:7-10; Testimony of Amelia Sedgwick, Tr. 253:9-13.
187 Id.; see also Testimony of Dr. Donna Schuurman, Tr. 479:12-480:11.
188 See 18 U.S.C. § 1113; N.D.C.C. 12.1-06-01.
189 Weiss, 993 F.3d at 161.
190 See ECF No. 1 at ¶¶51-78.
191 Miller Compl. ¶60, citing, H Campbell and T Hansen, “Is Narco-Violence in Mexico Terrorism?” 33, No. 2
Bulletin of Latin Am Research, 158, 159 (2014).
192 Id.
193 Id.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 28 of 165

29
public places, hanging them from bridges and buildings and displaying them in theatrical
poses.”194 The Cartel also burns vehicles after assassinations.195
107. 	The Miller Complaint also sets forth examples of particular attacks carried out by
Defendant against U.S. and Mexican citizens which fit these descriptions and patterns.196
108. 	These acts have:
Political ends rather than simply an individual expression of
psychopathology: 	it 	is 	planned 	and 	organized, 	not 	simply
spontaneous and random; it is revenge and retribution-oriented act
of violence that responds to perceived social inequality, trauma,
abuse, marginalisation, frustration and humiliation; it is dramatic
and spectacular and designed to seek publicity, renown, celebrity,
recognition, and reaction; and it is violence committed primarily by
young males, many of whom are poor and socially deprived
(although those ordering narco-terrorism do not necessarily share
those characteristics); it is violence that transforms society and
instills fear, chaos, alarmism and governmental response.197
109. 	And throughout Mexican history there have been “several events where La Línea
has attacked civilians like this case. Public servants, former police, prosecutors, former
politicians.”198
110. 	These attacks against innocent civilians and public officials and prosecutors and
former police officers are objectively intended to coerce or intimidate civilians and
government officials from acting.199
194 Id.
195 Id.
196 See, Miller Compl. ¶63-78.
197 Miller Compl. ¶61, citing H Campbell and T Hansen, “Is Narco-Violence in Mexico Terrorism?” 33, No. 2
Bulletin of Latin Am Research, 158, 159 (2014) at pg. 162.
198 Testimony of Enrique Baeza, Tr. 114:8-10.
199 Id. at Tr. 114:14-18.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 29 of 165

30
111. 	“La Línea’s intention is to intimidate civilians so that they don’t testify against
them. And also they intimidate public servants so that they don’t investigate them….”200
112. 	In addition, “[b]urning vehicles [such as Rhonita’s] and burning houses down is a
signature of La Línea’s. The objective is to cause terror in people.”201
113. 	Based on facts adduced from evidence at trial and significant documentation of
Defendant’s tactics found in the public record, and as set forth in the Miller Complaint, the
attacks carried out by Defendant were objectively intended to intimidate and coerce a
civilian population and to influence policy of a government by intimidation and coercion.
(3) Occurred Primarily Outside the Territorial Jurisdiction of the U.S.
114. 	The November 4, 2019 murder of United States citizens Christina Langford,
Rhonita LeBaron and her four children, and Dawna Ray and her two children, and
attempted murders of United States citizens F.M.J. and seven of Dawna’s children occurred
in the Mexican state of Sonora.202 As documented by the Mexican prosecutorial file, the
attacks occurred on a road bordering the Mexican states of Sonora and Chihuahua.203
115. 	It is undisputed that the attacks took place outside the territorial jurisdiction of the
United States.
200 Id. at Tr. 114:18-20; see also U.S. v. Vicente Carrillo-Fuentes, Case No. 3:97-cr-00665-PRM (W.D. Tex.),
Document 11 (Superseding Indictment), Aug. 16, 2010, at Counts 37-45 (Defendant indicted for “intentionally killed
and counseled, commanded, induced, procured and caused the international killing” of nine separate individuals “with
the intent to prevent the communication” by these individuals “to a law enforcement officer of the United States of
information relating to the commission or possible commission of a federal offense.”; U.S. v. Vicente Carrillo Fuentes,
Case No. 1:09-cr-00522-SJ (E.D.N.Y.), Document 6 (Superseding Indictment), Oct. 2, 2019 (the Juaréz Cartel
“maintained its power in part through the payment of bribes to law enforcement and public officials, and through
numerous acts of violence. [Mr. Carrillo-Fuentes], as a member and leader of the [Juaréz Cartel], employed ‘sicarios,’
or hitmen, who carried out hundreds of acts of violence, including murders, assaults, kidnappings, assassinations and
acts of torture” at Carrillo-Fuentes’ direction. One of the reasons provided by the Grand Jury for these directions was
to protect “members of the [Juaréz Cartel] from arrest and prosecution by silencing potential witnesses and retaliating
against anyone who provided information or assistance to law enforcement authorities.”).
201 Id. at Tr. 115:10-12.
202 Mexican Government Apostille 2, Ex. 4 T_000152-155; see also Mexican Government Apostille 1, Ex. 3
T_000133-37.
203 Id.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 30 of 165

31
c. 	By Reason of Act of International Terrorism
116. 	As discussed in detail supra, the November 4, 2019, attack by the Cartel on
Christina Langford and her daughter, F.M.J.; Rhonita and her four children, H.M. Jr.,
K.B.M., T.G.M., and T.A.M.; and Dawna and her nine children was an attack on innocent
women and children that resulted in the death of three women and six children.204
117. 	“The evidence collected shows that it was members of La Línea criminal
organization … who carried out these attacks killing these individuals.” 205
118. 	Defendant used gasoline and other explosive, incendiay and toxic components of a
motor vehicle as a device similar to a bomb. 	Defendant also used firearms —.223 caliber,
7.62x39 mm, .308 caliber and 50 mm rifle ammunition206 — during the attacks. These are
destructive devices and firearms as defined by section 921, thus weapons of mass
destruction under the ATA. 207 Their use here involved violent acts and acts dangerous to
human life in violation of criminal laws of the United States and the states, including North
Dakota.
119. 	The Defendant’s “objective was to shoot at anyone who came across th[e] road
[traveled by Rhonita, Christina, Dawna and their children] be it civilians, assassins from
an opposing group or police. For example, at Bavispe they shot at the victims then in Agua
Prieta they killed civilians and several police from that city. Th[is] shows what their
objective was.”208
204 Mexican Government Apostille 4, Ex. 70 T.
205 Testimony of Enrique Baeza, Tr. 113:19-21.
206 Mexican Government Apostille 2, Ex. 4 T_000153.
207 18 U.S.C. § 2332a(c)(2).
208 Testimony of Enrique Baeza, Tr. 115:2-6.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 31 of 165

32
120. 	The objective of the Cartel, by burning Rhonita, H.M. Jr., K.B.M. and the twins
was “to cause terror in people.” 209
121. 	The Court finds the affidavits and reports offered by Plaintiffs—Exhibits 25, 26,
27, 28, and 29—as expert testimony to be admissible pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 702 and
703. Each of the proffered witnesses are experts qualified by their knowledge, skill,
experience, training and/or education on the subject matters of automobile mechanics,
traumatic and life-threatening injuries, and grief.
d. 	Injured In Person
122. 	The murder of Rhonita, Christina, Dawna and their children, H.M. Jr., K.B.M.,
T.A.M., T.G.M., T.L. and R.L. and the attempted murder of F.M.J., K.L., D.L., M.L., C.L.,
J.L., X.L., and B.L. are all the types of injuries to “his or her person” as set forth in 18
U.S.C. § 2333(a).
123. 	In addition to those who were present during the ambush, courts addressing claims
under the ATA have almost uniformly allowed “solatium damages in suits brought under
the ATA regardless of the availability of such damages under the general tort law of the
state in which the district court sits” as such damages evince the deterrent intent of the
ATA as a mechanism in the fight against terrorism.210
124. 	The following paragraphs will outline the relationships of the Plaintiffs to the
victims of this action:
209 Id. at Tr. 115:11-12.
210 See Rosenberg v. Lashkar-e-Taiba, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87724, at *75-*76 (E.D.N.Y. July 5, 2016); see also
Miller v. Arab Bank, PLC, 372 F. Supp. 3d 33, 41 (E.D.N.Y. 2019).
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 32 of 165

33
(1) Rhonita LeBaron
125. 	Howard Miller is the surviving husband of Rhonita LeBaron, and the surviving
father of H.M. Jr., K.B.M, T.G.M., and T.A.M.211
126. 	T.M., A.M., and Z.M. are the surviving children of Rhonita and surviving siblings
of H.M. Jr., K.B.M., T.G.M. and T.A.M.212
127. 	Adrian 	LeBaron-Soto 	and 	Bathsheba 	Shalom 	Tucker 	(hereinafter 	“Shalom
Tucker”) are Rhonita’s surviving father and mother.213
128. 	Rholena Lian Johnson, Adriana Jones, Melissa Conklin, William LeBaron, Ruthila
LeBaron, Daver LeBaron, Miguel LeBaron, Javier LeBaron, Laura Corina LeBaron, and
Matthew LeBaron are Rhonita’s surving siblings.214
(2) Christina Langford
129. 	Tyler Johnson is the surviving husband of Christina Langford, and the surviving
father of F.M.J.215
130. 	Christina and Tyler have six surviving children together, each of whom have a
solatium claim arising from the death of Christina—C.J., J.J., T.J., H.J., E.J., F.M.J. 216
131. 	Amelia Sedgwick is the surviving mother of Christina Langford.217
211 Declaration of Howard Miller, Ex. 30 ¶ 3; Civil Registration of Marriage., Ex. 6.
212 Declaration of Howard Miller, Ex. 30, ¶ 3; Testimony of Howard Miller, Tr. 174:11-18, 174:2-5, 175:4-22.
213 Declaration of Adrian LeBaron-Soto, Ex. 36, ¶ 2; Testimony of Adrian LeBaron, Tr.194:15-24; Declaration of
Bathsheba Shalom Tucker, Ex. 37, ¶ 3.
214 Declaration of Rholena Lian Johnson, Ex. 47, ¶ 3; Declaration of Adriana Jones, Ex. 46, ¶ 2; Testimony of Adriana
Jones, Tr. 496:14-17; Declaration of Melissa Conklin, Ex. 45, ¶ 3; Declaration of William LeBaron, Ex. 41, ¶ 3;
Declaration of Ruthila LeBaron, Ex. 44, ¶ 3;Declaration of Dayer LeBaron, Ex. 43, ¶ 3; Testimony of Dayer LeBaron,
Tr. 71:17-22; Declaration of Miguel LeBaron, Ex. 40, ¶ 3; Declaration of Javier LeBaron, Ex. 42, ¶ 3; Declaration of
Laura Corina LeBaron, Ex. 39, ¶ 3; Declaration of Matthew LeBaron, Ex. 38, ¶ 1.
215 Declaration of Tyler Johnson, Ex. 31, ¶¶ 3, 10; Testimony of Tyler Johnson, Tr. 354:6-11.
216 Id. at ¶ 10; Testimony of Tyler Johnson, Tr. 358:15-20.
217 Declaration of Amelia Sedgwick, Ex. 32, ¶ 4; Testimony of Amelia Sedgwick, Tr. 233:25.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 33 of 165

34
132. 	Isaac Langford, Serina Langford, Elizabeth Langford, and E.L., a minor under the
guardianship of Amelia, are Christina’s surviving siblings.218
(3) Dawna Ray
133. 	David Langford and Dawna Ray shared 13 children—Crystal Langford, Brandy
Spenst, Bryce Langford, Joseph Cole Langford, K.L., D.L., T.L., M.L., C.L., J.L., X.L..
R.L., and B.L. 219
134. 	David Langford is the surviving father of T.L. and R.L. who were killed on
November 4, 2019 with their mother.
135. 	K.L., D.L., M.L., C.L., J.L., X.L., and B.L. are the surviving children of Dawna
Ray and the surviving siblings of T.L. and R.L. who were present in the vehicle at the time
of the attack on November 4, 2019.
136. 	K.L., M.L., C.L., X.L., and B.L. sustained non-fatal gunshot wounds in various
degrees of severity in the attack on November 4, 2019.
137. 	Karen Woolley is the surviving mother of Dawna Ray.220 Ms. Woolley is also
Jonathan Ray’s legal guardian.221
138. 	Jaremy Ray, James Ray, Justin Ray, Jonathan Ray, Kerah Ray, and Amber Ray are
Dawna’s surviving siblings.222
218 Declaration of Isaac Langford, Ex. 35, ¶ 3; Declaration of Serina Langford, Ex. 34, ¶ 1; Declaration of Elizabeth
Langford, Ex. 33, ¶1; Declaration of Amelia Sedgwick, Ex. 32, ¶¶ 3-4.
219 Testimony of David Langford, Tr. 322:15-16; Declarations of Joseph Cole Langford, Bryce Langford, Crystal
Langford, Brandy Spenst, K.L., M.L., D.L., C.L. J.L., and David Langford, Exs. 57-66.
220 Declaration of Karen Woolley, Ex. 48, ¶ 5; Testimony of Karen Woolley, Tr. 263:16.
221 Guardianship Documents of Jonathan Ray, Ex. 23.
222 Declaration of Jaremy Ray, Ex. 49, ¶ 3; Declaration of James Ray, Ex. 52, ¶ 3; Declaration of Justin Ray, Ex. 51,
¶ 3; Declaration of Jonathan Ray, By and Through Legal Guardian Karen Woolley, Ex. 53, ¶4; Declaration of Kerah
Ray, Ex. 50, ¶ 3; Declaration of Amber Ray, Ex. 54, ¶ 3.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 34 of 165

35
B. Damages
1. 	Damages under the Antiterrorism Act
139. 	While Plaintiffs’ claims are proceeding under both federal law and state statutory
and common law, it is important to note that “the ATA incorporates ‘general principles of
tort law.’ … The basic presumption is that Congress creates federal torts against the
background of general tort law….”223
140. 	The ATA provides “private parties the right to pursue common tort claims against
terrorist organizations and those that provide material support or financing to terrorist
organizations.” 224
141. 	In fact, when the ATA was initially enacted in 1991, Senator Grassley stated that
the ATA “removes the jurisdictional hurdles in the courts confronting victims and it
empowers victims with all the weapons available in civil litigation …. The [ATA] accords
victims of terrorism the remedies of American tort law.”225 This language “suggests that
Congress intended that the full range of damages should be available to persons entitled to
bring actions pursuant to §2333(a).”226
142. 	In short, because Plaintiffs have satisfied their burden under the ATA, the state-law
claims are superfluous as Plaintiffs are not seeking to “double dip” regarding damages in
this case, as the ATA incorporates (and likely exceeds) the damages mechanisms available
under state common-law remedies.
143. 	The legislative history underpinning 18 U.S.C. § 2333(a) “in combination with the
language of the statute itself, evidences an intent by Congress to codify general common
223 See Linde v. Arab Bank, PLC, 97 F. Supp.3d 287, 336 (E.D.N.Y. 2015).
224 Weiss v. Nat’l Westminster Bank, PLC, 242 F.R.D. 33, 50 (E.D.N.Y. 2007).
225 Litle v. Arab Bank, PLC, 611 F. Supp.2d 233, 245 (E.D.N.Y. 2009), quoting 137 Cong. Rec. S4511 (Apr. 16, 1991).
226 Estates of Ungar v. Palestinian Authority, 304 F. Supp.2d 232, 265 (D.R.I. 2004).
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 35 of 165

36
law tort principles and to extend civil liability for acts of international terrorism to the full
reaches of traditional tort law.”227
144. 	This legislative history also “evinces a clear congressional intent to deter and
punish acts of international terrorism” and to “hold[] terrorists accountable ‘where it hurts
them most: at their lifeline, their funds.’”228
145. 	In Ungar, the Magistrate Judge held that “[t]he deterrent effect of [18 U.S.C. §
2333] will be maximized if it is interpreted to subject terrorists to the broadest possible
range of damages” including “pecuniary damages … and also for non-economic damages,
including loss of companionship, society, and mental anguish experienced by the victim’s
surviving family members, including his siblings.” 229
146. 	Based on this precedent, damages in the ATA context apply not only to those who
were injured and/or killed, but also to their immediate family members who sustained loss
of their loved ones as a result of the attack.
147. 	In ATA death cases that have reached a judgment, such as this case, courts have
measured pecuniary economic loss (including loss of income, loss of parental services,
etc.) and also non-economic loss including conscious pain and suffering (for the decedent’s
and survivor’s) and mental pain and anguish (solatium) for the family members of the
decedent(s) falling within the categories of parents, spouses, children, and siblings. 	In
many cases, courts have taken guidance from cases arising under an analogous statute, the
“terrorism exception” to foreign sovereign immunity codified at 28 U.S.C. § 1605A.
227 Boim v. Quranic Literacy Institute, 291 F.3d 1000, 1010 (7th Cir. 2002) (citing various provisions of the legislative
history leading to the enactment of the civil damages provision of the Antiterrorism Act).
228 Estates of Ungar, 304 F. Supp.2d at 238 (citing additional provisions of the legislative history of 18 U.S.C. § 2333).
229 Ungar, 304 F. Supp.2d at 267 (fully adopted by the District Judge in Ungar); see also Morris, 415 F. Supp. 2d at
1337; Knox v. Palestine Liberation Organization, 442 F. Supp. 2d 62 (S.D.N.Y. 2006).
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 36 of 165

37
a. 	Estate Damages for Pain and Suffering
148. 	Estate Plaintiffs under the ATA are eligible for damages based on the amount of
pain and suffering endured before death and the amount of time between injury and
death.230 	The Court may also consider any mental anguish caused by observing injured
relatives present at the scene.231
149. 	In Ungar, decided in 2004, the court determined that the length of the attack was
between ten seconds and 30 seconds with the court accepting 30 seconds for purposes of
establishing damages for conscious pain and suffering where the decedent had lost
consciousness at least by the end of the attack.232 	There, the court looked to values for
conscious pain and suffering generally in cases arising under the “terrorism exception” to
determine an appropriate quantum of damages for the decedent’s conscious pain and
suffering:
The physical injuries suffered by [the decedent] prior to his losing
consciousness 	were 	severe 	and 	caused 	great 	pain. 	In 	addition, 	he
experienced the mental pain resulting from observing that his wife had been
horribly wounded and probably killed while seated next to him and knowing
that his young son, lying in the back seat, was in danger of being
killed. While this physical and mental agony was of mercifully brief
duration, 	a 	substantial 	award 	for 	pain 	and 	suffering 	is 	justified.
Accordingly, I recommend an award of $500,000 for pain and suffering to
the estate. Cf. Smith v. Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, 262 F. Supp. 2d 217,
No. 01 CIV. 10132(HB), 2003 WL 21027170, at *15 (S.D.N.Y. May 16,
2003) (awarding $2.5 million for pain and suffering to estate of plaintiff
who realized he was trapped and doomed in the North Tower of World
Trade Center and likely experienced a very painful death); Weinstein v.
Islamic 	Republic 	of 	Iran, 184 	F. 	Supp. 	2d 	13, 	18, 	23 	(D.D.C.
2002) (awarding $10 million for pain and suffering to estate of bombing
victim who survived with severe burns for forty-nine days and who suffered
a higher level of pain throughout his stay at the hospital than a patient with
his injuries otherwise would have endured because usual doses of pain
230 See Mastrantuono v. United States, 163 F. Supp. 2d 244 (S.D.N.Y.2001); see generally Peterson v. Islamic
Republic of Iran, 515 F. Supp. 2d 25, 51 (D.D.C. 2007).
231 Ungar, 304 F. Supp. 2d at 270.
232 Id.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 37 of 165

38
medication could have lowered his blood pressure and killed him); Elahi v.
Islamic Republic of Iran, 124 F. Supp. 2d 97, 113 (D.D.C. 2000) (finding
$1 million appropriate compensation for pain and suffering of decedent who
apparently struggled with his assassin for thirty seconds before being shot
eight times); Higgins v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS
22173, No. 1:99CV00377, 2000 WL 33674311, at *8 (D.D.C. Sept. 21,
2000) (awarding $30 million for pain and suffering where decedent was
held captive for 529 days in primitive conditions and whose body indicated
grievous injuries and barbaric mutilations); Eisenfeld v. Islamic Republic of
Iran, 172 F. Supp. 2d 1, 5, 8 (D.D.C. 2000) (concluding that $1 million was
appropriate to compensate for “several minutes” of pain and suffering of
bombing victim who expired on the scene); Flatow v. Islamic Republic of
Iran, 999 F. Supp. 1, 29 (D.D.C. 1998) (finding $1 million appropriate to
compensate for three to five hours of pain and suffering of bombing
victim).233
150. 	More recent precedent validates this approach to damages for conscious pain and
suffering.234 	In Gates, two U.S. civilian contractors were beheaded by al-Qaeda in Iraq
and “suffered unimaginable mental and physical agony” as “[e]ach man was alive
throughout a significant portion of the beheading and knew his death was upon him, with
pain and blood and indescribable suffering.”235 The court proceeded to award, to each
estate, “compensatory damages for pain and suffering in the amount of $50,000,000.00.”236
233 Id.
234 See Hirshfeld v. Islamic Rep. of Iran, 330 F. Supp. 3d 107, 145 (D.D.C. 2018) (awarding $1 million in “survival
damages” where the decedent was shot, “was conscious, fearful and suffering for at least a few minutes after he was
shot because he was able to run away from the shooter and into a building and then make it to the stairwell, where he
was later found deceased”); Braun v. Islamic Rep. of Iran, 228 F. Supp. 3d 64, 83 (D.D.C. 2017) (awarding $1 million
where evidence showed decedent “suffered being thrown into the air and an impact that caused her head to become
smashed and her to begin vomiting and that she survived for two hours after the Attack, during which time she was
attended to by medical personnel”).
235 Gates v. Syrian Arab Republic, 580 F.Supp.2d 53, 72-74 (D.D.C. 2008)
236 Id. at 74.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 38 of 165

39
(1) Rhonita LeBaron
151. 	Rhonita LeBaron was “born” and “made” to be a mother.237 “[F]amily was the
single most important thing in the world to her”.238 “[S]he was like an angel and her life
was her family, her husband, and her friends.”239
152. 	On November 4, 2019, she was “so excited to be traveling to Phoenix. She was
looking forward to seeing Howard …. She was also excited to be able to go shopping for
the kids”, and, according to her older sister Lian Johnson, “[i]t was kind of cute to see her
so excited about the trip and reuniting with Howard.”240
153. 	Unfortunately, that excitement turned to “just total terror”241 about forty-five
minutes to an hour after Rhonita and her children left La Mora.
154. 	As stated supra, Rhonita’s vehicle was impacted by 321242 bullets from the
approximately 923 shots243 fired by the Defendant from .223 caliber, 7.62x39mm, .308
caliber and 50mm long-gun rifles244 from approximately 114 – 200 meters away “from the
rear part of the vehicle.”245
155. 	Dr. Schubl is “convinced” and therefore, it was his “expert opinion that … Rhonita
probably survived th[is] initial assault.”246
156. 	The evidence substantiates Dr. Schubl’s opinion as Rhonita’s seat was reclined
towards the back seat.247 The reclining of her seat was a conscious and deliberate attempt
237 Testimony of Adriana Jones, Tr. 503:10-11.
238 Declaration of Bathsheba Shalom Tucker, Ex. 37, ¶ 16
239 Testimony of Kenneth Miller, Tr. 41:4-5.
240 Declaration of Rholena Lian Johnson, Ex. 47, ¶ 16.
241 Testimony of Dr. Schubl, Tr. 160:22-25.
242 Rhonita LeBaron 1006 Summary Chart, Ex. 14; Mexican Government Apostille 1 Ex. 3 T_000226-000233.
243 Rhonita LeBaron 1006 Summary Chart, Ex. 14; Mexican Government Apostille 2 Ex. 4 T_000153.
244 Rhonita LeBaron 1006 Summary Chart, Ex. 14; Mexican Government Apostille 2, Ex. 4 T_000153.
245 Rhonita LeBaron 1006 Summary Chart, Ex. 14; Mexican Government Apostille 2, Ex. 4 T_000160.
246 Testimony of Dr. Schubl, Tr. 154:14-17.
247 See Declaration of Adrian LeBaron-Soto, Ex. 36_000050, 53; Testimony of Adrian LeBaron-Soto, Tr. 220:12-16.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 39 of 165

40
by Rhonita to shield herself from the onslaught of bullets and not the result of the fire as
evidenced by the fact that on pages 48, 50, and 57 of Exhibit 36, the other seats in Rhonita’s
vehicle are shown in their standard upright-position.
157. 	Dr. Schubl testified, to a reasonable degree of medical certainty, that “if you start
when the first bullet was shot until the last person in [Rhonita’s] car took their last breath,
that must have been close to an hour, maybe 45 minutes of just total terror.”248
158. 	“Think about as a parent what that feels like when your kids are in the back of this
car. They’re hurt; they’re scared. You’re hurt; you’re terrified, and there’s nothing you can
do.” 249
159. 	“Just the emotional impact of both physical pain and knowing your life is likely to
end; and for the mothers, of course, not being able to protect their children. It’s …
unimaginable.”250
160. 	“And then they set the car on fire.”251
161. 	The air became “superheated” and Rhonita, H.M. Jr., K.B.M., T.G.M., and T.A.M.
were then “breathing in fire.”252 So not only were they “burning from the outside, [they
were] burning from the inside.” 253 Then all the oxygen within the vehicle was completely
consumed by the fire, so not only were Rhonita, H.M. Jr., K.B.M., T.G.M., and T.A.M.
“burning to death after being shot, but [they were] also suffocating. [They were]
asphyxiating because there’s no oxygen left in the air.”254
248 Testimony of Dr. Schubl, Tr. 160:22-25.
249 Id. at Tr. 159:23-25.
250 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 481:6-19.
251 Testimony of Dr. Schubl, Tr. 160:1.
252 Id. at Tr. 160:9-10.
253 Id. at Tr. 160:10-11
254 Id. at Tr. 160:11-14.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 40 of 165

41
162. 	Even worse, Dr. Schubl testified, to a reasonable degree of medical certainty, that
Rhonita, H.M. Jr., K.B.M., T.G.M., and T.A.M..’s sensation—their ability to hear, see,
smell, feel, perceive and fear—remained intact as they sat in their car “burning to death,
watching their siblings, their family members burn to death.”255
163. 	The abhorrent amount of pain and suffering Rhonita, H.M. Jr., K.B.M., T.G.M.,
and T.A.M. experienced—and established to a reasonable degree of medical certainty by
Dr. 	Schubl—must 	have 	been 	“the 	most 	frightening 	thing 	that 	anyone 	has 	ever
experienced.”256
164. 	Human bodies are resilient. Rhonita would have had full sensation intact during
the fire. She was able to “hear and feel”257 and “watch[]”258 her family, “the single most
important thing in the world to her,”259 “burn to death.”260
165. 	“It was, quite obviously and scientifically, a very cruel and inhumane … death.”261
166. 	The evidence in this case “is fully satisfactory to prove the pain and suffering
experienced by” Rhonita LeBaron while she “remained conscious before [she] died.” 262
167. 	Given the testimony provided by Dr. Schubl along with eyewitness testimony and
video evidence recorded by the Defendant Juárez Cartel, the attack in which Rhonita
LeBaron and four of her children were killed was horrific, heinous, and inhuman. 	The
Court is tasked with applying a figure to the pain and suffering that was sustained
assuming—as Dr. Schubl testified—that it was more likely than not that Rhonita and her
255 Id. at Tr. 160:15-161:2.
256 Id. at Tr. 161:2-3.
257 Id. at Tr. 160:16.
258 Id. at Tr. 161:1.
259 Declaration of Bathsheba Shalom Tucker, Ex. 37, ¶ 16
260 Testimony of Dr. Schubl, Tr. 161:1-2.
261 Gates, 580 F.Supp.2d at 73 (internal quotations omitted).
262 Id. at 74.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 41 of 165

42
children survived the hail of bullets that were directed at their vehicle and only perished as
a result of the intentionally set fire on and in the vehicle. The case whose facts most closely
match the mental anguish and pain suffered by Rhonita is the Gates case in which two U.S.
civilian contractors were beheaded by al-Qaeda in Iraq and “suffered unimaginable mental
and physical agony” as “[e]ach man was alive throughout a significant portion of the
beheading and knew his death was upon him, with pain and blood and indescribable
suffering.”263 In that case, the court proceeded to award, to each estate, “compensatory
damages for pain and suffering in the amount of $50,000,000.00.” 264
168. 	While the circumstances surrounding the deaths of Rhonita and her four children
who were killed appears to rival that of the Gates scenario in terms of the actual horror,
there are two mitigating factors from the Gates case—the individuals had been held hostage
for multiple days before their executions, and their executions were broadcast for the whole
world to see 265 —that support a downward departure from the Gates pain-and-suffering
figures here. The Court applies a 30% downward departure here that places the base value
of pain-and-suffering damages for Rhonita LeBaron and each of her four children at
$35,000,000.00. 	The Court has chosen to apply inflationary calculations to these base
values from the time that Gates was decided on September 26, 2008 and February 2022.266
Therefore, this Court awards compensatory damages for pain and suffering in the amount
of $45,390,000.00 (rounding to the nearest ten thousand) to the Estate of Rhonita LeBaron.
263 Gates v. Syrian Arab Republic, 580 F.Supp.2d 53, 72-74 (D.D.C. 2008)
264 Id. at 74.
265 Id. at 57-58 (setting out the facts regarding the hostage-taking, the announcement of the murders, and the
broadcast on the Internet of the beheadings).
266 Inflation from September 2008, when Gates was decided, to February 2022, has risen approximately 29.7%. See
https://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 42 of 165

43
(2) H.M. Jr., K.B.M., T.A.M., and T.G.M.
169. 	H.M. Jr. was born on July 12, 2007 (twelve (12) years old on November 4, 2019);
K.B.M. was born on September 25, 2009 (ten (10) years old on November 4, 2019); and
the twins T.A.M. and T.G.M. were born on March 13, 2019 (seven (7) months old on
November 4, 2019).267
170. 	H.M. Jr. “loved to play basketball; he played all day, every day, with [his father]
and with his cousins. He was a huge Kobe Bryant fan. He also enjoyed playing Fortnite
with his cousins”268 and he loved “Ramen noodles”.269
171. 	Rhonita was “so proud of the man [H.M. Jr.] had become; he would milk the cows
before school and always be ready to go before it was time to go.” 270 And she was excited
to be going to Phoenix on November 4, 2019, on “a trip to spoil [H.M. Jr.] and [K.B.M].”271
172. 	K.B.M. was “a great big sister and liked to help Rhonita with her younger siblings.
The family nicknamed her ‘Momma [K.B.M.]’ because she was such a natural with kids,
just like her mom.”272
173. 	K.B.M. was also a “fashionista” and took her “pink purse” with her everywhere.273
174. 	The twins—T.A.M. and T.G.M.—were happy, healthy, non-fussy seven-month-old
twins.274 “T.G.M. never even cried!”275 “They were both just starting to sit up on their own
and T.A.M. was beginning to crawl” in November 2019.276
267 Declaration of Howard Miller, Ex. 30, ¶ 10.
268 Id. at ¶ 45.
269 Testimony of Howard Miller, Tr. 187:15-18.
270 Declaration of Adriana Jones, Ex. 46, ¶ 15.
271 Testimony of Howard Miller, Tr. 180:23:24.
272 Declaration of Howard Miller, Ex. 30, ¶ 46.
273 Declartion of Adriana Jones, Ex. 46, ¶ 27.
274 Declaration of Howard Miller, Ex. 30, ¶ 47.
275 Id.
276 Id.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 43 of 165

44
175. 	As stated supra, Rhonita’s vehicle was impacted by 321277 bullets from the
approximately 923 shots278 fired by the Defendant from approximately 114 – 200 meters
away “from the rear part of the vehicle.”279
176. 	Dr. Schubl is “convinced” and therefore, it is his “expert opinion that … all four of
the children and Rhonita probably survived th[is] initial assault.”280
177. 	The evidence substantiates Dr. Schubl’s opinion as H.M. Jr.’s remains were “found
half-in/half-out of the vehicle. He knew they were in trouble and he was trying to flee.” 281
178. 	It appears that K.B.M. “knew of and appreciated the danger she and her family
w[ere] in” as her remains were “found in the back row, curled up in the fetal position trying
to hide beneath the seat.” 282 She was “so tightly curled up [into the fetal position] that … a
little pink piece of her leather purse under her arm[]” was found by her aunts and uncles
while they prepared her remains for burial.283
179. 	This would not have been possible had H.M. Jr. or K.B.M. “been incapacitated by
the bullets themselves.”284
180. 	Furthermore, because F.M.J.—who was near the same age as the twins when her
vehicle was assaulted and and survived the shooting attack, it is Dr. Schubl’s expert opinion
that “it is more likely [than not] that Rhonita Miller’s infant twins who were also in car
seats survived the gun shot attacks on their vehicle before the fire was set [, and therefore,]
277 Rhonita LeBaron 1006 Summary Chart, Ex. 14; Ex. 3 T_000226-000233.
278 Rhonita LeBaron 1006 Summary Chart, Ex. 14; Ex. 4 T_000153.
279 Rhonita LeBaron 1006 Summary Chart, Ex. 14; Ex. 4 T_000160.
280 Testimony of Dr. Schubl, Tr. 154:14-17.
281 Declaration of Bathsheba Shalom Tucker, Ex. 37, ¶ 43; see also Declaration of Adrian LeBaron-Soto, Ex.
36_000049, 57-59, 77-79.
282 Declaration of Bathsheba Shalom Tucker, Ex. 37, ¶ 44; see also Ex. 37_000053-55.
283 Declaration of Adriana Jones, Ex. 46, ¶ 27; see also Testimony of Adriana Jones, Tr. 518:11-18.
284 Testimony of Dr. Schubl, Tr. 154:12-13.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 44 of 165

45
it is extremely likely that Rhonita, [H.M. Jr., K.B.M., T.A.M. and T.G.M] were conscious,
receptive, aware and alive when their vehicle was intentionally set on fire.”285
181. 	Death by fire in a confined space, like an automobile, “arguably is the worst way
you can die”, but according to Dr. Schubl that is not “a real summary” of the “terror” H.M.
Jr., K.B.M., T.A.M. and T.G.M. “had to deal with on that day.”286
182. 	One has “to look at it from the start to the finish of the entire assault” 287 :
a. 	The Cartel unleashed a hail of gunfire – approximately 923 bullets.288
b. 	This required “reloading multiple times, and emptying their weapons and reloading
again. This stretched on for minutes, many minutes.”289
c. 	Now the “car can’t move anymore,” H.M. Jr., K.B.M., T.A.M. and T.G.M. are in
“total panic” but “can’t get out of the car because the attackers are right outside.”290
We know that H.M. Jr. did not try and flee during this point as there is no mention
of anyone trying to flee the scene in the transcription from the video taken by the
Cartel.291
d. 	H.M. Jr., K.B.M., T.A.M. and T.G.M. could see the Cartel coming down the hill,
all the assassins were “carrying weapons”, and they “kn[e]w what’s about to
happen”—their family was about to be murdered by the Defendant.292
e. 	The Cartel then surrounded the vehicle, and in Dayer LeBaron’s expert opinion,
they “douse[d] the car” with gasoline, “actually opened [H.M. Jr.’s] door and threw
285 Expert Report of Dr. Schubl, Ex. 25_000025.
286 Testimony of Dr. Schubl, Tr. 158:19-24.
287 Id. at Tr. 158:25-159:1.
288 Rhonita LeBaron 1006 Summary Chart, Ex. 14; Mexican Government Apostille 2 Ex. 4 T_000153.
289 Testimony of Dr. Schubl, Tr. 159:3-4.
290 Id. at Tr. 159:6-8.
291 Mexican Government Apostille 3 Ex. 5 T_000035.
292 Testimony of Dr. Schubl, Tr. 159:14-15.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 45 of 165

46
the gasoline into the car.”293 The amount of fear and anxiety H.M. Jr. and the other
children must have endured when the Defendant opened his door and poured
gasoline on him is unconscionable.
183. 	Applying the same application of Gates as set forth above for their mother, this
Court 	awards 	compensatory 	damages 	for 	pain 	and 	suffering 	in 	the 	amount 	of
$45,390,000.00 each to the Estates of H.M. Jr., K.B.M., T.A.M. and T.G.M.
(3) Christina Langford
184. 	Christina Marie Langford was born November 23, 1987.294
185. 	She was a “fierce, protective” mother and “wanted her children to learn to be
obedient and to be responsible and love one another and to know God. [She] [w]anted them
to be good people. She wanted to teach them that. She homeschooled them and didn’t like
them watching TV.”295
186. 	Christina loved Tyler, her husband, and “no matter what” she was going to be with
her husband, “always be where he [was]” and always “be there for him.”296 And in
November 2019, that meant moving to North Dakota “to go start a new life”.297
187. 	Serina Langford, Christina’s sister, “had never in [her] life seen Christina so happy.
She was so excited to be meeting up with Tyler, the kids and to be moving to North Dakota.
She was so excited to have their entire family together.”298 The entire family would not,
and never will be, together again.
293 Testimony of Dayer LeBaron, Tr. 75:21-22; Testimony of Dr. Schubl, Tr. 159:16-20.
294 Declaration of Amelia Sedgwick, Ex. 32 ¶ 5.
295 Testimony of Amelia Sedgwick, Tr. 242:10-14.
296 Testimony of Douglas Johnson, Tr. 409:1-3.
297 Testimony of Tyler Johnson, Tr. 361:24.
298 Declaration of Serina Langford, Ex. 34, ¶ 12.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 46 of 165

47
188. 	The Cartel ambushed and murdered Christina “14 kilometers and 700 meters
north”299 of where the Cartel murdered Rhonita and her children.
189. 	Christina’s vehicle was struck by 41 bullets300 from approximately 327 shots301
fired by the Defendant from .223 caliber and 7.62x39 mm long-gun rifles302 from
approximately 136-139 meters303 “ahead and to the right”304 of Christina’s vehicle.
190. 	According to Mr. Baeza—the prosecutor in-charge of the Mexican criminal
investigation/prosecution—Christina “stepped out of her vehicle with her hands up in the
air saying that there were women and children and asking for [the Cartel] not to shoot, but
still the assassins shot and killed her.”305
191. 	Christina was shot, outside the vehicle, “just below her left shoulder” exiting
“underneath her right arm” this “was most definitely the fatal shot that killed her.”306 While
this was ultimately the fatal shot, it was not the only gunshot wounds Christina sustained
that morning; she sustained three (3) additional gunshot wounds to her right arm, right and
left thighs.307
192. 	Dr. Schubl has “no doubt whatsoever that Christina survived the initial hail of
bullets, the hundreds of rounds that were discharged at her vehicle, the 41 that impacted
her vehicle.”308
299 Mexican Government Apostille 1, Ex. 3 T_000133.
300 Mexican Government Apostille 1, Ex. 3 T_000227-28.
301 Mexican Government Apostille 2, Ex. 4 T_000155.
302 Id.
303 Mexican Government Apostille 1, Ex. 3 T_000136.
304 Mexican Government Apostille 1, Ex. 3 T_000220.
305 Testimony of Enrique Baeza, Tr. 112:18-23.
306 Testimony of Dr. Schubl, Tr. 146:1-5; see also Ex. 20.
307 Testimony of Dr. Schubl, Tr. 147:2-5; see also Mexican Government Apostille 4, Ex. 70 T_000009-10.
308 Testimony of Dr. Schubl, Tr. 148:8-10.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 47 of 165

48
193. 	During this time, it is Dr. Schubl’s expert opinion that, Christina would have had
and experienced the “thousand yard stare” or “this concept of doom” which is an
“instinctive panic that sets in because you know that you’ve been lethally or nearly lethally
injured. You’re bleeding internally. Your heart’s racing. You’re emotionally overloaded.
You’re terrified.”309
194. 	The 	terror 	and 	panic 	Christina 	endured 	during 	this 	period 	of 	time 	was
“compound[ed]” by the fact that 1) “her 7-month-old child is right behind her, subject to
the same assault” and because 2) over time it became “more and more clear that no one’s
coming to help” her and her daughter.310
195. 	It is Dr. Schubl’s expert opinion that the gunshot wound to the chest was not
“immediately lethal” and that Christina as a result “probably laid down or crawled for some
minutes after that and then was probably conscious for at least 10 or 15 more minutes, if
not longer.”311
196. 	As in Smith, where there was direct evidence of the decedent’s surviving the initial
crash of the plane into the North Tower on 9/11312 , here too there is direct evidence from
both the Mexican authorities313 and Dr. Schubl to substantiate the fact that with “no doubt
whatsoever [] Christina survived the initial hail of bullets, the hundreds of rounds that were
discharged at her vehicle, the 41 that impacted her vehicle.”314
197. 	Given that there is clear evidence that Christina survived the initial hail of bullets,
that the ensuing time must have been emotionally and physically terrorizing, and that her
309 Id. at Tr. 149:10-16.
310 Id. at Tr. 149:4-5, 17-18.
311 Id. at Tr. 148:14-17.
312 Smith ex rel Smith v. Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, 262 F.Supp.2d 217, 238-39 (S.D.N.Y. 2003).
313 Testimony of Enrique Baeza, Tr. 112:18-23.
314 Testimony of Dr. Schubl, Tr. 148:8-10.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 48 of 165

49
death was very painful, the Court awards the Estate of Christina Langford, after accounting
for inflation and in line with Smith, $11,550,000.00.315
(4) Dawna Ray
198. 	Dawna Ray was a woman with many friends and no enemies.316 Dawna loved
caring for her garden and enjoyed drinking coffee each morning.317 She loved visiting with
friends, but, above all else, she loved her family.318 As a mother, she instilled in her children
the principles of virtue and love.319 She also ensured that each of her children felt
individualized attention and love by preparing beautifully decorated cakes and planning
special celebrations on their birthdays.320
199. 	On November 4, 2019, Dawna was traveling to a family wedding where her nine
children, including T.L. and R.L., could play and celebrate with their cousins.321 Near the
location of Christina’s vehicle, the Cartel disabled Dawna’s vehicle by firing at least 72
rounds.322
200. 	As eyewitness testimony from two of her children attested, Dawna survived the
initial gunshots, yelling for her children to “[g]et down” and praying to God for the safety
of her family.323 Not only did she survive to experience the panic and fear of a lethal attack
315 Inflation has risen approximately 54% since May 2003 when Smith was decided to February 2022.
https://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm; The court in Smith awarded the estate $7.5 million dollars for
pain and suffering ($2.5 million “for which all the defendant [were] jointly and severally liable. In addition, pursuant
to § 2333, the al Qaeda defendants” were liable “for an additional $5 million”). Smith, 262 F.Supp.2d at 239.
316 Testimony of David Langford, Tr. 322:5-9.
317 Id. at Tr. 322:9-10.
318 Id. at Tr. 322:10-12.
319 Id. at Tr. 322:17-19.
320 Id. at Tr. 324:10-20.
321 Testimony of K.L., Tr. 293:11-16, Testimony of D.L., Tr. 305:12-13.
322 Expert Report of Dr. Schubl, Ex. 25_000009.
323 Testimony of K.L., Tr. 295:11-12, Testimony of D.L., Tr. 307:6-9.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 49 of 165

50
on her children, she also witnessed the top of her son’s (T.L.’s) skull blown off by a
gunshot.324
201. 	Because evidence establishes that Dawna survived the initial attack, experienced
emotional and physical terror, and witnessed the brutal murder of her son, T.L., the Court
awards an upward adjustment from damages in Smith based on Dawna witnessing one of
her 	minor 	children 	being 	brutally 	killed. 	Whereas 	the 	judgment 	in 	Smith 	was
$7,500,000.00, the Court awards a 33% upward baseline adjustment, after accounting for
inflation325 , to the Estate of Dawna Ray of $15,440,000.00 for pain and suffering damages.
(5) T.L. and R.L.
202. 	T.L. had an active imagination and loved to make his siblings laugh.326 R.L. was
K.L.’s “mini me”; he looked like her and he refused to be separated from K.L. even
sleeping in her bed at night.327
203. 	As to R.L., he experienced the emotional terror of the initial attack while his sister
K.L. attempted to push him to safety underneath the seat.328 Although his conscious
suffering was short, “there is no set formula for quantifying the pain and suffering” R.L.
experienced.329
324 Expert Report of Dr. Schubl, Ex. 25_000009.
325 Inflation has risen approximately 53% since May 2003 when Smith was decided to January 2022.
https://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm The court in Smith awarded the estate $7.5 million dollars for pain
and suffering ($2.5 million “for which all the defendant [were] jointly and severally liable. In addition, pursuant to §
2333, the al Qaeda defendants” were liable “for an additional $5 million”). Smith, 262 F.Supp.2d at 239.
326 Testimony of K.L., Tr. 302:22-23
327 Id. at Tr. 294:21, 302:9-20, Testimony of David Langford, Tr. 325:1-4.
328 Testimony of K.L., Tr. 295:18-19.
329 Pugh v. Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, 530 F. Supp. 2d 216, 263 (D.D.C. 2008) (awarding the
plaintiffs’ estates $18,000,000.00 for 89 to 179 seconds of suffering including aircraft decompression, the breakup
of the airplane at 35,000 feet, being hit by shards of shrapnel from the exploded aircraft, and plummeting to their
death while likely on fire from the explosion).
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 50 of 165

51
204. 	As to T.L., he experienced the emotional terror of the initial attack, hearing his
mother yell, “Get down.” 330 But before he could find safety, he died from a fatal gunshot
wound to his head.331
205. 	Given that there is clear evidence that T.L. and R.L. survived the initial hail of
bullets, that the ensuing time must have been emotionally and physically terrorizing, and
that their death was very painful, this Court awards, after accounting for inflation and in
line with Smith, $11,550,000.00 each to the Estates of T.L. and R.L. for pain and suffering
damages.332
b. 	Survivor Damages Pain and Suffering
206. 	Pain and suffering damages for individuals who were injured in an attack but who
did not succumb to their injuries are also available. 	Again, looking to precedent arising
from FSIA cases demonstrates a range of values for pain and suffering damages in these
circumstances. Many courts addressing damages in a “directly injured” situation followed
what has been referred to as the Heiser framework.
207. 	A more recent decision set forth the criteria for applying the Heiser framework:
a court begins with baseline amounts and may adjust upward or downward
to account for individual circumstances. For a directly-injured claimant,
“[c]ourts generally ‘begin[] with the baseline assumption that persons
suffering substantial injuries in terrorist attacks are entitled to $5 million in
compensatory damages.’” Barry I, 410 F. Supp. 3d at 180 (quoting Wultz,
864 F. Supp. 2d at 37-38). An upward adjustment to the $7 to $12 million
range may be appropriate “in more severe instances of physical 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
330 Testimony of D.L., Tr. 307:6-9.
331 Expert Report of Dr. Schubl, Ex. 25_000795.
332 Inflation has risen approximately 54% since May 2003 when Smith was decided to February 2022.
https://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm; The court in Smith awarded the estate $7.5 million dollars for
pain and suffering ($2.5 million “for which all the defendant [were] jointly and severally liable. In addition, pursuant
to § 2333, the al Qaeda defendants” were liable “for an additional $5 million”). Smith, 262 F.Supp.2d at 239.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 51 of 165

52
84. Conversely, a downward departure to the $1.5 million to $3 million
range may be appropriate “where victims suffered relatively more minor
injuries, such as ‘minor shrapnel injuries,’ or ‘severe emotional injury
accompanied by relatively minor physical injuries.’” Barry I, 410 F. Supp.
3d at 180 (first quoting Valore, 700 F. Supp. 2d at 84, then quoting Estate
of Doe v. Islamic Republic of Iran (Estate of Doe II), 943 F. Supp. 2d 180,
186 (D.D.C. 2013)). Such awards for physical injuries “assume severe
psychological 	injuries.” Schertzman 	Cohen, 	2019 	U.S. 	Dist. 	LEXIS
115278, 2019 WL 3037868, at *6 (citing Wamai, 60 F. Supp. 3d at 92-
93).333
208. 	In litigation arising out of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, injury
judgments asserted against Iran have yielded an upward adjustment from the Heiser
framework. In a more recent application of pain and suffering damages that arose as part
of the September 11 Litigation, the Court “establishe[d] a baseline award of $7 million, an
upward deviation of $10 million, and a downward deviation of $5 million. 	The Court,
however, reserves its discretion to award further upward departures in exceptional
cases.”334
(1) F.M.J.
209. 	In Miller, this analysis would apply to the claims related to minor F.M.J. as the only
Plaintiff who was present during the attack who was not killed as a result of the attack on
the vehicle where she was a passenger.
210. 	Seven-month-old F.M.J. was traveling with her mother on November 4, 2019, and
during the attacks, her car seat was shot three times.335 It was reported for “a good three
hours” that F.M.J. was dead. 336
333 Barry v. Islamic Rep. of Iran, 437 F. Supp. 3d 15, 53 (D.D.C. 2020).
334 Burnett v. Islamic Rep. of Iran, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22849, at *606 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 7, 2020) (Magistrate Judge’s
Report and Recommendation adopted by the District Judge).
335 Photo of F.M.J.’s car seat, taken by Tyler Johnson, Ex. 11.
336 Testimony of Tyler Johnson, Tr. 375:24-25.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 52 of 165

53
211. 	Fortunately, F.M.J. survived, “but barely.” 337 “[S]he was [found] strapped into a
car seat alone with her mother dead outside the car[,] … severely dehydrated”338 with “a
tiny drop of blood on the top of her head … as if one of the bullets or a piece of plastic
from the car seat or something where the bullet had whizzed past had nicked the very top
of her head.” 339
212. 	F.M.J. was strapped into that car seat alone and terrified “for a good eight, nine
hours.”340
213. 	When she was found, and given to Shalom Tucker,341 F.M.J. “was limp, quiet and
soaked in bodily fluids.”342 F.M.J. “was in total, complete shock and fear.”343
214. 	The fact that F.M.J. was seven months old at the time of the attack does not,
according to Dr. Schuurman,344 mean that she did not—nor will she not in the future—
have to deal with the physical and mental pain and suffering associated with being present
for, and a survivor of, this unconscionable attack on her and her mother. It is Dr.
Schuurman’s 	expert 	opinion 	that 	F.M.J. 	“will 	likely 	grapple 	with 	the 	horrifying
circumstances of her mother’s death, and more likely than not will need professional help
to do so.”345
337 Testimony of Dr. Schubl, Tr. 150:7.
338 Id. at Tr. 150:7-10.
339 Testimony of Amelia Sedgwick, Tr. 253:9-13.
340 Testimony of Tyler Johnson, Tr. 372:3.
341 Family Photo of Shalom Tucker and F.M.J., Ex. 22.
342 Declaration of Bathsheba Shalom Tucker, Ex. 37_000005, ¶ 33.
343 Id.
344 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 430:10-25.
345 Expert Report of Dr. Schuurman, Ex. 26_000016.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 53 of 165

54
215. 	It is also Dr. Schuurman’s expert opinion that F.M.J. is a high risk for “continuing
and persistent symptoms of trauma and grief, including depression, anger, sadness, anxiety,
helplessness, and hopelessness.”346
216. 	In addition, some “have described F.M.J. living as a miracle”347 which may, in Dr.
Schuurman’s expert opinion confer additional “pressure” on F.M.J. “to perform in ways
that aren’t always consistent” with her personality.348
217. 	“Decisions to deviate from the starting points provided by the Heiser framework
are committed to the discretion of the particular court in each case.”349 “An upward
adjustment [for survivor pain and suffering damages] … may be appropriate in more severe
instances of physical and psychological pain, such as where victims … were mistaken for
dead.”350
218. 	F.M.J. was mistaken for dead, severely dehydrated, terrified and alone strapped into
her car seat for what must have felt like an enternity. Accordingly, and in no uncertain
terms does F.M.J.’s inability to (currently) verbalize and express the sheer scope of the
severe physical and psychological pain and suffering she endured on November 4, 2019,
undermine her claim for, and upward departure to, survivor pain and suffering damages.
219. 	Nonetheless, the limited physical injuries sustained by F.M.J. may require the Court
to temper an upward adjustment and instead, rely on the baseline value applied in the
Burnett action arising out of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001.
346 Expert Report of Dr. Schuurman, Ex. 26_000010.
347 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 479:24-25.
348 Id. at Tr. 480:3-6.
349 Barry, 437 F. Supp. 3d at 53 (quoting Oveissi, 768 F.Supp.2d at 26).
350 Id. (internal citation and quotations omitted).
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 54 of 165

55
220. 	Accordingly, the Court awards, after accounting for inflation, of $7,680,000.00 in
compensatory non-economic, survivor pain and suffering damages to F.M.J.351
(2) C.L.
221. 	Eight-year-old C.L. was traveling with his mother and siblings on November 4,
2019. During the attack, C.L. suffered grievous gunshot wounds, including a 4 x 6
centimeter wound to his jaw, a puncture wound on his left leg, a puncture wound on his
right chest, a puncture wound on his right forearm, and a 6 x 8 centimeter wound on his
right leg.352 Additionally, he witnessed the gruesome murders of his mother, his brother
T.L., and his brother R.L. 353
222. 	With their mother dead and no means to contact their relatives, the children were
on their own to tend to their wounds and to find help.354 C.L.’s suffering continued in the
aftermath of the attack. His siblings held a pillow to his missing jaw to stanch his bleeding
while carrying him down the mountain.355 He could not walk given the gaping gunshot
wound on his right leg, exposing tendon and muscle.356
223. 	While waiting more than ten hours for his eventual rescue, he was unable to drink
any water because it would leak through his jaw wound. 357 Even after his rescue, he did
not receive proper hydration and medical care until more than 14 hours after the attack.358
351 Inflation has risen approximately 9.6% since Burnett was decided in February 2020 to February 2022. See
https://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm
352 Testimony of David Langford, Tr. 343-44:22-25; Declaration of C.L., Ex. 64; Supplemental Declaration of David
Langford, Ex. 72 at 70.
353 Declaration of C.L., Ex. 64.
354 Testimony of D.L., Tr. 309:7-9, 24-25.
355 Id. at Tr. 310:16-18.
356 Declaration of C.L., Ex. 64, Supplemental Declaration of David Langford, Ex. 72, at 5-6.
357 Testimony of K.L., Tr. 300:21-23.
358 Testimony of David Langford, Tr. 343:15-24.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 55 of 165

56
224. 	C.L. underwent seven surgeries to address his wounds, had his jaw wired shut, and
remained in the hospital for two months after the attack.359 Even so, C.L. will require a
future surgery to replace missing teeth—that is, if his jaw sufficiently regrows to hold new
teeth.360
225. 	When C.L. was released from the hospital, he used a wheelchair.361 Through
physical therapy he learned to walk again, albeit with a limp.362 To this day, he experiences
pain in his hip from his injuries and permanent facial disfigurement.363
226. 	Not only does C.L. suffer from his permanent physical injuries, but he also suffers
from witnessing the murders of his mother and siblings. C.L. continues to have nightmares
about the day of the attack.364 Treating physicians acknowledged that C.L. and the other
Langford children present for the attack will require “significant social support” due to the
traumatic nature of their injuries as well as the injuries and deaths their mother and
siblings.365
227. 	As all the case law demonstrates, “there is no exact comparison, and indeed, strict
application of precedent could lead to conflicting conclusions about an appropriate
award.”366 Evaluating each victim’s unique suffering is undeniably difficult and an inexact
science.367 Considering all the circumstances, the court awards $12,000,000.00 to C.L. in
359 Declaration of C.L., Ex. 64; Supplemental Declaration of David Langford, Ex. 72 at 68; Testimony of David
Langford, Tr. 347:1-9.
360 Testimony of David Langford, Tr. 347:10-15.
361 Declaration of C.L., Ex. 64 at 10.
362 Declaration of C.L., Ex. 64, at 10; Declaration of David Langford, Ex. 66 at 41.
363 Declaration of C.L., Ex. 64, at 10.
364 Declaration of David Langford, Ex. 66, at 39-41.
365 Supplemental Declaration of David Langford, Ex. 72, at 136.
366 Brewer v. Islamic Rep. of Iran, 664 F. Supp. 2d 43, 57 (D.D.C. 2009).
367 Id.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 56 of 165

57
accordance with the Burnett decision which, adjusted for inflation, totals $13,160,000.00
in compensatory non-economic, survivor pain and suffering damages.
(3) K.L., M.L., X.L., and B.L.
228. 	Fourteen-year-old K.L., nine-year-old M.L., four-year-old X.L., and eight-month-
old B.L. were also traveling with their mother and siblings on November 4, 2019. 368 During
the attack, K.L. suffered a gunshot wound to her foot369 ; M.L. suffered a gunshot wound
to her back and forearm, causing nerve damage370 ; X.L. suffered a shoulder facture and a
gunshot wound two inches in diameter to his shoulder371 ; and B.L. suffered a six-centimeter
laceration across his chest, exposing his muscle, and a fractured wrist.372 Additionally, they
witnessed the gruesome murders of their mother, their brother T.L., and their brother
R.L. 373
229. 	When the firing began, K.L. described fear resonating inside the vehicle, hearing
her siblings screaming for the entire attack, and her mother praying.374 Similar to C.L. their
suffering continued in the aftermath of the attack, K.L. carried her injured brothers, X.L.
and B.L., down a rugged and mountainous road even though she was barefoot and had
suffered a gunshot wound to her foot.375
230. 	They waited more than ten hours in freezing temperatures without food, water, or
warmth for their rescue while fearing that the cartel would return to kill them.376
368 Testimony of D.L., Tr. 305-06:24-5.
369 Testimony of David Langford, Tr. 345:1-4.
370 Id. at Tr. 345:6-8.
371 Supplemental Declaration of David Langford, Ex. 72, at 197.
372 Testimony of David Langford, Tr. 346:21-24; Supplemental Declaration of David Langford, Ex. 72, p. 26.
373 Declaration of K.L., Ex. 61; Declaration of M.L., Ex. 62; Declaration of David Langford, Ex. 66.
374 Declaration of K.L., Ex. 61, at 9, 13.
375 Testimony of K.L., Tr. 297:14-18; 297:25-298:4.
376 Declaration of K.L., Ex. 61, at 3.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 57 of 165

58
231. 	M.L. attempted to reach La Mora alone to save her siblings even though she was
barefoot and injured.377 However, she became disoriented and made a wrong turn down an
unused road to Bavispe.378 Undoubtedly, she experienced sheer terror wandering through
the pitch-black desert lost for hours.
232. 	Each child was hospitalized to treat their injuries.379 Although their physical
injuries healed, treating physicians acknowledged that all the Langford children present for
the attack will require “significant social support” due to the traumatic nature of their
injuries as well as the injuries and deaths of family members.380 Each of them acted to save
each other and they all carry guilt that they could not save their brother T.L. and their baby
brother R.L., who was sitting on K.L.’s lap at the moment of attack.381
233. 	Accordingly, the Court awards, accounting for inflation and in accord with the
standard upward deviation in the Burnett decision, $10,970,000.00 each in compensatory
non-economic, survivor pain and suffering to K.L., M.L., X.L., and B.L.
(4) D.L. and J.L.
234. 	Thirteen-year-old D.L. and six-year-old J.L. were also traveling with their mother
and siblings on November 4, 2019. Miraculously, D.L. and J.L. avoided any gunshot
wounds, but still suffered the physical and emotional trauma in the aftermath of the attack.
235. 	D.L. witnessed his mother, Dawna, slump over her steering wheel as she died from
multiple gunshot wounds.382 During the attack, D.L. looked over to his brother T.L., who
377 Declaration of K.L., Ex. 61.
378 Testimony of Kenneth Miller, Tr. 62:10-24.
379 Supplemental Declaration of David Langford, Ex. 72, at 25-228
380 Id. at 136.
381 Declaration of K.L., Ex. 61, at 12.
382 Declaration of D.L., Ex. 63 at 10; Expert Report of Dr. Schubl, Ex. 25_00009, 000788
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 58 of 165

59
was missing the top of his skull from a gunshot wound and over to his brother R.L. who
died on the floorboard from multiple gunshot wounds. 383
236. 	After the attack, D.L. carried his brother C.L. and assisted with carrying X.L. for
20 minutes towards La Mora.384 When D.L. could not carry C.L. any farther, he
volunteered to continue the eight-mile journey to La Mora while his siblings waited near
the road for help to arrive.385 Slowing his progress, the cartel actively shot at D.L., forcing
him to hide in bushes and veer from the main road.386 During his entire run down the
mountain, D.L. thought his siblings’ survival depended on him finding family to rescue
them.387
237. 	J.L. waited on the mountain in the near-freezing temperatures with K.L., M.L.,
X.L., and B.L. for D.L.’s return.388
238. 	As with their siblings, D.L. and J.L. will require “significant social support” due to
witnessing the traumatic injuries and deaths of his close family members.389 To this day,
D.L. finds it difficult to talk about the events of the attack, often referring to the attack as
“the tragedy that happened.”390 They suffer from the emotional toll of losing their loved
ones in a horrific attack, from nightmares, and from anxiety upon hearing loud noises.391
239. 	Accordingly, 	the 	Court 	awards 	$10,000,000.00 	each 	in 	compensatory 	non-
economic, survivor pain and suffering to D.L. and J.L.
383 Declaration of D.L., Ex. 63 at 9-10.
384 Testimony of D.L., Tr. 310-11:16-2.
385 Id. at Tr. 310-11:24-2.
386 Id. at Tr. 312-13:23-8.
387 Id. at Tr. 314:4-5; Declaration of D.L., Ex. 63 at 14.
388 Declaration of D.L., Ex. 63 at 13.
389 Supplemental Declaration of David Langford, Ex. 72, p. 136.
390 Testimony of D.L., Tr. 313:22.
391 Declaration of D.L., Ex. 63 at 22.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 59 of 165

60
c. 	Pain and Suffering Damages for Survivors of Victims/Solatium Damages
240. 	In the terrorism context under the Antiterrorism Act, “non-economic damages are
… available, including loss of companionship and society, and mental anguish experienced
by the victim’s surviving family members.”392 	Put more plainly, “[c]ourts permit
‘[p]laintiffs to pursue claims for solatium [emotional] damages’ under the ATA.”393
241. 	“Courts addressing the availability and amount of solatium damages in terrorism
cases … have considered damages awards in other terrorism cases, including those decided
under the related terrorism exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (‘FSIA’),
28 U.S.C. § 1605A….” 394
242. 	Under the FSIA, solatium damages are awarded to compensate “the mental anguish,
bereavement, and grief that those with a close relationship to a decedent experience as the
result of the decedent’s death, as well as the harm caused by the loss of the decedent’s
society and comfort.”395
243. 	For the pain and suffering of relatives who were not present at the site of the attack,
damages “must be determined by the nature of the relationship and the severity and
duration of the pain suffered by the family member.”396 The factors that may be considered
in assessing solatium damages are: “(1) whether the decedent’s death was sudden and
unexpected; (2) whether the death is attributable to negligence or malice; (3) whether the
claimants have sought medical treatment for depression or related disorders resulting from
392 Lelchook v. Islamic Rep. of Iran, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 221606, at *20 (E.D.N.Y. Nov. 23, 2020).
393 Estate of Henkin, 495 F. Supp. 3d at 152; see also Weinstock v. Islamic Rep. of Iran, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75532,
at *11-*12 (S.D. Fla. May 6, 2019) (addressing availability of solatium damages in default judgment against the
foreign terrorist organization Hamas).
394 Weinstock, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56937, at *12; see also Goldstein, 383 F. Supp. 3d at 19 (“courts strive to
maintain consistency for awards as between the specific plaintiffs and among plaintiffs in comparable situations.”).
395 Valore v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 700 F. Supp. 2d 52 (D. D.C. 2010).
396 Brewer v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 664 F. Supp. 2d 43, 55 (citing Haim v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 425 F. Supp.
2d 56).
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 60 of 165

61
the decedent’s death; (4) the nature (i.e., closeness) of the relationship between the claimant
and the decedent; and (5) the duration of the claimant’s mental anguish in excess of that
which would have been experienced following the decedent’s natural death.”397
244. 	The Heiser decision created a framework also for solatium damages for the family
members of individuals who were killed in terrorist attacks:
In determining the amount of compensatory damages awards to family
members of a surviving victim, this Court has held that these awards are
determined by the “nature of the relationship” between the family member
and 	victim, 	and 	“the 	severity 	of 	the 	pain 	suffered 	by 	the 	family
member.” Haim, 425 F. Supp. 2d at 75. Spouses typically receive greater
damage awards than parents, who, in turn, receive greater awards than
siblings. Compare, e.g., Anderson v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 90 F. Supp.
2d 107, 113 (D.D.C. 2000) (Jackson, J.) (awarding $10 million to the wife
of 	a 	hostage 	and 	torture 	victim); Sebago, 	18 	F. 	Supp. 	2d 	at
70 (same), with Eisenfeld, 172 F. Supp. 2d at 8 (awarding $5 million each
to the parents and $2.5 million each to the siblings of victims of a suicide
bombing on a passenger bus); see also Flatow, 999 F. Supp. at 31 (awarding
parents each $5 million and siblings each $2.5 million of victim who was
killed 	in 	the 	same 	passenger 	bus 	bombing 	in 	which 	Seth 	was
injured). Moreover, “families of victims who have died are typically
awarded greater damages than families of victims who remain alive.” Id.
While the loss suffered by the plaintiffs in these cases is undeniably difficult
to quantify, courts typically award between $8 million and $12 million for
pain and suffering resulting from the death of a spouse, approximately $5
million to a parent whose child was killed, and approximately $2.5 million
to a plaintiff whose sibling was killed.398
245. 	The September 11 Litigation altered the determination of solatium damages. 	In
that litigation, the court adopted solatium values of $12.5 million for spouses, $8.5 million
for parents, $8.5 million for children, and $4.25 million for siblings.399 	In making its
determination, the court stated that “[c]onsidering the extraordinarily tragic circumstances
surrounding the September 11th attacks, and their indelible impact on the lives of the
397 Rosenberg, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87724, at *104-*105, quoting Knox, 442 F. Supp. 2d at 78.
398 Heiser v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 466 F. Supp. 2d 229, 269.
399 Havlish v. bin Laden, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 110673, at *105-*106 (S.D.N.Y. July 30, 2012). These awards were
upward departures of 56% for spouses and 70% for parents and siblings from Heiser.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 61 of 165

62
victims’ families” it was “appropriate to grant the upward departures from the Heiser
framework.”400
246. 	The above precedent are solely guidelines, as adjustments from baseline awards are
available. “These numbers, however, are not set in stone.”401 Courts have discretion to
“grant solatium damages based on the particular facts of each case, subject to abuse-of-
discretion review for errors of law, clearly erroneous factual findings and faulty
reasoning.”402
247. 	Adjustments upward may be warranted when the evidence establishes: “an
especially close relationship between the plaintiff and decedent, particularly in comparison
to the normal interactions to be expected given the familial relationship; medical proof of
severe pain, grief or suffering on behalf of the claimant; and circumstances surrounding
the terrorist attack which made the suffering particularly more acute or agonizing.”403
248. 	Furthermore, “families of torture and hostage-tak[en] victims are typically awarded
greater damages than are the families of victims of a single attack because in the former
cases, the afflicted party not only had to cope with the grief that follows the loss of a loved
one, but—at the time of the event was also forced to endure unending anxiety and an
extended period of extreme distress over the health and safety of their captive family
member.”404
249. 	As stated by Adriana Jones, and family members infra, initial thoughts in this case
were that their family members were kidnapped which was “still horrible to think about so
400 Id.
401 Greenbaum v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 451 F.Supp.2d 90, 108 (D.D.C. 2006) (emphasis added).
402 Warmbier v. Democratic People’s Rep. of Korea, 356 F. Supp. 3d 30, 58 (D.D.C. 2018) (internal citations
omitted).
403 Oveissi, 768 F. Supp. 2d at 26-27; see also Flanagan, 87 F. Supp. 3d at 118.
404 Warmbier, 356 F.Supp.3d at59 (internal citation and quotations omitted).
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 62 of 165

63
[the families were] still devastated but [they were] devastated because they’re kidnapped.
… [they were] thinking how [K.B.M.] must be feeling and are [the Cartel] going to take
this little girl and … [a]re they going to rape Nita and [K.B.M.]”405
250. 	Such anguish and “first-hand observations and acute memories of their child’s
death” led the court in Warmbier to award a 300% upward adjustment from Heiser to the
decedent’s parents. 406
251. 	Additionally, as the court noted in Greenbaum, “larger awards are typically
reserved for cases with aggravating circumstances that appreciably worsen the surviving
spouse’s pain and suffering”.407 This may be indicated by things such as “[t]estimony
which describes a general feeling of permanent loss or change caused by decedent’s
absence” or “[m]edical treatment for depression and related affective disorders.”408
252. 	Through report and testimony evidence, Dr. Donna Schuurman from The Dougy
Center in Portland, Oregon proffered her expert opinions as to the grief, loss and
bereavement of “two of the families who were impacted by the death of Rhonita and the
death of Christina.”409
253. 	Dr. Schuurman discussed the four risk factors (all of which are present in this case)
that affect children when a parent dies, as well as ten complicating factors that arise when
a parent is murdered.410
254. 	The four risk factors include:
405 Testimony of Adriana Jones, Tr. 507:5-13.
406 Warmbier, 356 F.Supp.3d at 59 (internal citations and quotations omitted); see also Pugh, 530 F.Supp.2d at 266
(325% upward departure from Heiser for spouse; 320% upward departure from Heiser for siblings).
407 Greenbaum, 451 F.Supp.2d at 108.
408 Flatow, 999 F.Supp at 31; Greenbaum, 451 F.Supp.2d at 108.
409 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 438:13-15; Expert Report of Donna Schuurman, Ex. 26.
410 Expert Report of Dr. Schuurman, Ex. 26_000005; see also Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 450:5-451:6.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 63 of 165

64
 	Higher risk for mental health problems, lower academic success, lower self-
esteem, and greater external locus of control (e.g. sensing oneself as a victim);
 	Higher risk for anxiety, depression, behavioral issues, and substance abuse;
 	Higher risk for depression among girls/aggression and acting out among boys;
and
 	Higher risk for depressive symptoms and future relationship challenges.411
255. 	There are ten “additional risk factors” (all of which are present in this case) that
apply to children who lose a parent, parent who lose a child, and siblings who lose a sibling
due to a “violent death”.412
256. 	The ten complicating factors include:
 	The closeness of the relationship;
 	Whether the death was sudden and occurred without warning;
 	Whether the loss was untimely;
 	Whether the manner of death was violent;
 	Whether the manner of death caused trauma to the loved one’s body;
 	Whether the surviving family members believe that the loved one may have
suffered;
 	Whether the death was caused by someone else’s negligence;
 	Whether the death is regarded as unjust;
 	Whether the person or persons whose actions brought about the death are held
accountable for what happened; and
411 Expert Report of Dr. Schuurman, Ex. 26_000005; see also Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 450:5 – 451:6.
412 Id. at Tr. 452:5-8.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 64 of 165

65
 	Whether the responsible party or parties show remorse for what happened413 .
257. 	First, Dr. Schuurman discussed how the closeness of the family related to the
families in this case. She stated: “And I have to say in this situation these three mothers,
wives, sisters, daughters, everyone loved. Were beautiful, caring women. And their
children with so much hope in front of them whose lives were just tragically ended that --
and I think numerous people have said, you know, no one had a bad word about Rhonita.
No one had a bad word about Christina, you know. And so the closeness of family,
immediate family as well as extended family -- and I do -- I will add that I think a protective
factor in this is the number of loving, caring family members and community members
who have surrounded the families because not everyone has that; so that is a helpful and
protective factor. And it doesn't bring them back.” 414
258. 	Risk factors “4 through 6, deal with a violent nature or the suffering of the
individual or the trauma caused to their body” and “the callousness and the ruthlessness
and the horror of how [these innocent women and children] were killed, [] just adds another
dimension” of risk and pain “that isn’t there when someone dies of a heart attack.”415
259. 	The impact to the Howard Miller and the entire LeBaron family, in particular,
knowing that Rhonita and the kids were conscious and alive when their vehicle was
incinerated beyond recognition “just adds more horror to the reality of what happened.” 416
As Rhonita’s mother, and H.M. Jr., K.B.M., T.A.M. and T.G.M.’s grandmother, Bathsheba
413 Expert Report of Dr. Schuurman, Ex. 26_000005-09; see also Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 452:15-456:11.
414 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 457:22-458:-8.
415 Id. at Tr. 458:10-18.
416 Id. at Tr. 459:2-3.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 65 of 165

66
Shalom Tucker, said the worst part of this all is that “it appears as if Nita and the kids knew
they were going to die.”417
260. 	As Rhonita’s father said, “[i]t was horrible, it was sickening; I cannot imagine a
more gruesome scene for a father and a family to have to encounter and … me, my wife
and family were forced to do the unconscionable, collect our families bones and ashes.”418
261. 	As it relates to Christina Langford, a complicating risk factor for her husband (Tyler
Johnson), children, mother and brother and sisters will be knowing that she exited her
vehicle to attempt to show that she was an innocent woman and yet her she was still
callously murdered.419
262. 	What happened to these families “is unjust. It is unfair. … [I]t is unlikely that every
perpetrator will be found and will be brought to justice let alone express remorse for their
behavior, and that is a reality that doesn’t end.”420 As Dr. Schuurman testified:
I think every parent, every father, every mother has it innately in them that
one of their roles is to protect their children. Every husband wants to protect
his wife and children, and the inability to do that in this horrific situation
adds to the complicating factors. It is unjust. It is unfair. … [I]t is unlikely
that every perpetrator will be found and will be brought to justice let alone
express remorse for their behavior, and that is a reality that doesn't end. You
don't some magical day say, "I think I'm okay with that." You know, it's
always there. And it's kind of like it's unresolvable. It fosters what we call
"rumination," which is a negative outcome actually. And rumination comes
from the word -- from animals that are ruminates that -- like cows that chew
their cud, chew their food but they never digest it. And so one of the
challenges here is there's not going to be some nice way to neatly wrap this
all in a package and tie a bow on it and say, "Okay. I think I'm done now.
It's all over." This has shaped and it will continue to shape every family
member who loved each of these children and each of these mothers.421
417 Declaration of Bathsheba Shalom Tucker, Ex. 37. ¶ 43.
418 Declaration of Adrian LeBaron-Soto, Ex. 36, ¶ 37.
419 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 459:11-25.
420 Id. at Tr. 460:10-14.
421 Id. at Tr. 460:6-461:14.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 66 of 165

67
263. 	Many of the family members in this case check all ten of these boxes, or have all
ten complicating factors present, and as such, they are at greater risk to experience, going
forward:
a. 	“[D]epression, 	major 	depressive 	disorder, 	certainly 	Posttraumatic 	Stress
Disorder[,] … sense of helplessness”; 422
b. 	“[C]ertainly, … higher levels of anxiety”.423
c. 	“[A] 	higher 	potential 	propensity 	for 	panic 	attacks,”424 	which 	have 	already
manifested themselves in Plaintiff’s Karen Woolley425 and Kerah Ray.426
d. 	“[S]eparation anxiety” which “has been evidence by some of the children”: “‘I
don’t want to sleep alone; I’m afraid to be alone; I don’t want to sleep alone; I want
to be around people.’”427
e. 	“[S]urvivor’s guilt. Why did I live and my sibling dies? … Why our family?” Why
didn’t I do X, Y or Z?” 428
264. 	As each family member expressed, 	through 	testimony and/or through sworn
declarations accepted into evidence during the trial, the deaths of Christina, Dawna,
Rhonita, and the children have had a profound effect on each of the family-member
Plaintiffs since the attack causing each of them injury.
265. 	Plaintiffs in this action also had to, among other things, “load[] up” their deceased
family members “into the back of a flatbed truck” and take them home and pack their
bodies with ice429 ; and “collect and piece together the remains of [their] daughter and
grandchildren”.430
422 Id. at Tr. 461:19 – 462:8.
423 Id. at Tr. 462:9-10.
424 Id. at Tr. 462:18-19.
425 Declaration of Karen Woolley, Ex. 48, ¶ 26.
426 Declaration of Kerah Ray, Ex. 50, ¶ 28.
427 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 463:1-4.
428 Id. at Tr. 463:11-13.
429 Declaration of Justin Ray, Ex. 51, ¶¶ 15, 16.
430 Declaration of Bathsheba Shalom Tucker, Ex. 37, ¶ 46.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 67 of 165

68
266. 	Dr. Schubl’s report and testimony describe in-detail the agonizing horror, mental
and physical pain and suffering Rhonita, H.M. Jr., K.B.M., T.A.M., T.G.M., and Christina
Langford431 went through and as Dr. Schuurman testified, this only “adds more horror to
the reality of what happened”432 for these families and will “complicate[] how [they] …
find peace.”433
267. 	Plaintiffs have suffered great personal loss due to the suffering and death of their
dearly loved family members. 	While some may have, and continue to suffer more than
others, all have suffered the particularly devastating and uniquely acute pain and suffering
arising from these particular events warranting upward enhancement departures.434
268. 	The fundamental aim of terrorism is to instill fear and trepidation – and that was
precisely what the Defendant’s objective was on November 4, 2019.435
269. 	Plaintiffs are those who paid the immediate price for this terrorist effect, and it is
the Plaintiffs who are, and forevermore will be, reminded constantly of the cruel and
terrible deaths their loved ones.
270. 	This case involves the murder of innocent women and children; not military
personnel, members of a peace-keeping force or independent contractors on hostile foreign
soil – these were innocent United States citizens in the prime of their lives traveling to be
with friends and family.
271. 	Plaintiffs have also requested that this Court apply upward departures from the
Havlish numbers for certain of the solatium awards sought to compensate for the litany of
431 See generally Expert Report of Dr. Schubl, Ex. 25; Testimony of Dr. Schubl, Tr. 141:13 – 149:18, 153:20 –
161:3.
432 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 459:2-3.
433 Id. at Tr. 459: 24-25.
434 Valore, 700 F.Supp.2d at 86
435 Testimony of Enrique Baeza, Tr. 115:10-12.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 68 of 165

69
aggravating circumstances present in this case and to reinforce the objectives of the ATA
that 1) United States citizens are off-limits and 2) that this Court, as will the courts
following the wake of this Court, will “hold terrorists accountable where it hurts them most:
at their lifeline, their funds.”436 Plaintiffs’ requests are discussed below.
272. 	The Court may also consider the rate of inflation that has occurred since these
framework cases were decided. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, from when
Havlish was decided in July 2012 to February 2022, inflation has risen 23% 437 ; meaning
that the present value of those claims evaluated ten years ago should be adjusted as follows:
Havlish solatium values 	Present Day solatium
values, accounting for
inflation438
Spouses 	$12,500,000.00 	$15,300,000.00
Parents 	$8,500,000.00 	$10,400,000.00
Children 	$8,500,000.00 	$10,400,000.00
Siblings 	$4,250,000.00 	$5,200,000.00
(1) Family of Rhonita LeBaron
(a) Howard Miller
273. 	United States citizen439 and North Dakota resident,440 Howard Miller is Rhonita
LeBaron’s husband, and H.M., Jr., K.B.M, T.A.M., T.G.M, T.M., Z.M., and A.M.’s
father.441 And on November 4, 2019, the Defendant with conscious indifference to human
life, and an evil-depraved heart callously murdered his wife, the best person he had ever
436 Estates of Ungar, 304 F. Supp.2d at 238 (internal citation and quotations omitted).
437 https://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm
438 https://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm
439 Declaration of Howard Miller, Ex. 30, ¶ 2.
440 Id.
441 Id. at ¶ 3.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 69 of 165

70
known,442 and his four children—H.M., Jr. (12), K.B.M. (10), T.A.M. (almost eight
months), T.G.M (almost eight months)— and inflicted substantial, forever emotional and
physical pain and suffering damages.
274. 	Rhonita and Howard met as teenagers443 and they knew immediately that they had
found their soul mates.444 And just a few short months later, they were married on August
2, 2006.445 It was “[y]oung love at its finest.” 446
275. 	Their family, and the LeBaron family, grew by one on July 17, 2007, with the birth
of their first child H.M. Jr.447 H.M. Jr. “loved his cousins and his friends. He loved to play
basketball and stay up late playing video games.”448
276. 	K.B.M. was born next on September 25, 2009.449 K.B.M. was the light of Howard’s
life and his “favorite child by far.”450 “She was always a daddy’s girl. Every time [Howard]
came home without fail she’d run up to [him] and g[i]ve [him] a big hug and big kiss and
always had [Howard’s] back no matter what.”451
277. 	K.B.M. “loved her American Girl dolls and would make clothes for them. She
wanted to be a fashion designer when she grew up.”452 But most impressive was “how
much of a mother she was to her baby brothers and sisters and how much she loved to hep
442 Testimony of Howard Miller, Tr. 166:7-8.
443 Declaration of Howard Miller, Ex. 30. at ¶ 4
444 See Declaration of Howard Miller, Ex. 30 at ¶ 7; Declaration of Bathsheba Shalom Tucker, Ex. 37, ¶ 9.
445 Declaration of Howard Miller, Ex. 30, ¶ 8; Civil Registration of Marriage, Ex. 6.
446 Testimony of Adriana Jones, Tr. 501:2-3.
447 Declaration of Howard Miller, Ex. 30, ¶ 10.
448 Testimony of Howard Miller, Tr. 171:7-9.
449 Declaration of Howard Miller, Ex. 30, ¶ 10.
450 Testimony of Howard Miller, Tr. 172:13-14.
451 Id. at Tr. 172:17-19.
452 Declaration of Adriana Jones, Ex. 46, ¶ 27.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 70 of 165

71
take care of them. … She was very good, helped out a lot with the twins. Helped A.M.
every day get ready and get dressed. Just the sweetest thing.”453
278. 	Rhonita “was an amazing mother.”454 She like to “do arts and crafts” with the kids,
“she like to teach them to serve the Lord”, “[s]he love taking them on all kinds of
adventures”, “loved taking them swimming”, “to the park, to the lake.”
279. 	On November 3, 2019, Howard was “very much” 455 looking forward to reuniting
with his wife and children the next day in Phoenix, AZ after working in the oil fields in
New Town, North Dakota.456
280. 	Via WhatsApp messages and phone calls, over a thousand miles away from his
family in Mexico, Howard learned that the “unimaginable”457 happened—his four children
and wife “burned to death” in what must have been “the most frightening thing that anyone
has ever experienced.”458
281. 	He already had a flight booked to Phoenix to spend a few days there with Rhonita,
H.M. Jr., K.B.M., T.G.M., and T.A.M. 459 He frantically tried to get to Mexico sooner, but
could not get a flight.460 After he reached Phoenix on his original flight, he drove through
the night to reach La Mora with Doug Johnson, his brother-in-law.461
282. 	But even after seeing the videos462 and speaking with family members who
confirmed that Rhonita and the kids were in the vehicle and had died—Howard held “out
453 Testimony of Howard Miller, Tr. 173:3-10.
454 Id. at Tr. 176:19.
455 Testimony of Howard Miller, Tr. 181:11.
456 Id. at Tr. 181:4.
457 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 481:12.
458 Testimony of Howard Miller, Tr. 160:21, Tr. 161:2-3.
459 Declaration of Howard Miller, Ex. 30 ¶ 17, 20; Testimony of Howard Miller, Tr. 181:2-9.
460 Testimony of Howard Miller, Tr. 181:6-9.
461 Id. at Tr. 183:11-17; Testimony of Douglas Johnson, Tr. 400:9-20.
462 Video taken by Kenny Miller, “Nita is Shot Up”, Ex. 8.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 71 of 165

72
hope kind of in nonbelief … maybe hoping they [his family] could have got out or
something.”463
283. 	That hope was shattered when Howard saw Rhonita, H.M. Jr., K.B.M., T.A.M. and
T.G.M.’s remains in the vehicle.464
284. 	And even though Howard could not bear the sight of the scene he, along with his
surviving children—T.M., A.M., and Z.M.—in keeping with their religious tradition, spent
the night and slept with Rhonita and H.M. Jr., K.B.M., T.A.M. and T.G.M.’s remains465
because he wanted to “spend one last night” together with his family.466
285. 	A piece of Howard feels as though it is missing after Rhonita’s death, as he testified:
“I loved Rhonita with all of my heart; she was my everything. I’ve lost the person I was
supposed to spend the rest of my life with and the mother to my children. I’m lost without
her.”467
286. 	Howard continues to miss H.M. Jr.’s “company, kind heart and just the things [they]
used to do together.”468 As for K.B.M, he misses “Everything. Her sweet smile. She's the
most beautiful girl I've ever seen in my life.”469 Howard “will never get to see T.A.M. and
T.G.M. take their first steps, or to hear them call [him] ‘Daddy.’ Th[is] pain is
unbearable.”470
463 Testimony of Howard Miller, Tr. 185:10-13.
464 Id. at Tr. 185:14-15; see Family Photos of Miller Attack Scene (Day), Ex. 18.
465 Photos of Miller Family Remains, Taken by Douglas Johnson, Ex. 73.
466 Testimony of Howard Miller, Tr. 186:5-14.
467 Declaration of Howard Miller, Ex. 30 ¶ 53.
468 Testimony of Howard Miller, Tr. 188:19-22.
469 Id. at Tr. 188:23-25.
470 Declaration of Howard Miller, Ex. 30 ¶ 56.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 72 of 165

73
287. 	This pain, and hurt is ever-present in Howard’s eyes since the attacks.471 He is
“numb”, “in shock,” and struggling “[b]e strong; be a man; be tough; keep [his] feelings
inside.”472
288. 	Rhonita’s family also has noticed how this all has affected Howard. 	Adriana
specifically told the Court how Howard goes to the gym constantly and will not drink
coffee because of how bad his anxiety is, and she sees how much he is holding so much
hurt and pain inside.473
289. 	Howard also reflected on the affect that this massacre has had, is having, and will
continue to have on his surviving children.474 He knows they will hurt when they do not
have their mother by their sides for big events like graduations, weddings, births of their
own children.475 He also sees their hurt the small moments they are missing: “the kids are
missing out on the routine moments, too.” 476
290. 	According to Howard’s father, Kenneth Miller, since the attacks Howard has
“closed” “into himself” and whenever Mr. Miller has tried to speak with his son and see
how he is doing, Howard “definitely [does not] want to talk about it.”477 	As a result, to
this day, Mr. Miller and his son have had only “surface” level discussions about what
happened and have had “absolutely” zero “in-detail” conversations. 478
471 Testimony of Douglas Johnson, Tr. 419:12-13.
472 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 464:20 – 465:5.
473 Testimony of Adriana Jones, Tr. 522: 1-12.
474 Declaration of Howard Miller, Ex. 30, ¶¶ 54, 55.
475 Declaration of Howard Miller, Ex. 30 ¶ 55
476 Id.
477 Testimony of Kenneth Miller, Tr. 68:7-13.
478 Id. at Tr. 68:20-21.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 73 of 165

74
291. 	Mr. Miller’s observation of his son being “closed into himself” was confirmed by
the testimony of Douglas Johnson, who stated that after the attacks, Howard has “closed
up” due to the pain and hurt that is ever-present and visible “in his eyes.”479
292. 	Dr. Schuurman also reflected on how Howard was doing. She stated that from her
interviews with Howard and other family members, as well as the testimony she observed
at trial, Howard’s coping mechanism is to internalize his feelings rather than to confide in
someone. Such avoidance of his feelings may lead, in Dr. Schuurman’s expert opinion, to
physical symptoms.480
293. 	Dr. Schuurman testified that Howard’s internalization of his feelings likely has
something to do with how masculinity is portrayed in mainstream society as well as his
smaller community. Dr. Schuurman believes that Howard feels the need to be strong for
his children and not show his feelings.481 Dr. Schuurman opined that Howard’s behaviors
and symptoms are consistent with trauma reactions and PTSD, including dissociative
reactions.482
294. 	Unfortunately, this places Howard at higher risk for longstanding emotional and
physical difficulties.483
479 Testimony of Douglas Johnson, Tr. 419:12-13.
480 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 465:12-25, 466:1.
481 Id. at Tr. 465:1-9.
482 Expert Report of Dr. Schuurman, Ex. 26_000011.
483 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 465:21-24.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 74 of 165

75
295. 	Mr. Miller has five solatium claims—one for his wife, and one for each of his four
children murdered on November 4, 2019:
Havlish
solatium
values
Present Day solatium
values, accounting for
inflation (rounded to the
closest $100,000) 484
Present Day solatium
values, accounting
for inflation
Spouse 	$12,500,000.00 	$15,300,000.00 	$15,300,000.00
Parent 	$8,500,000.00 	$10,400,000.00 	$41,600,000.00485
Total 	$56,900,000.00
296. 	The Court addresses, infra., Plaintiffs’ request for an upward departure from these
figures for Plaintiff Howard Miller for the loss of his wife Maria Rhonita LeBaron and the
loss of his children—K.B.M., H.M. Jr., T.A.M., and T.G.M.
(b) T.M.
297. 	United States citizen486 and North Dakota Resident 487 T.M. was born on March 22,
2011. He was the third oldest of Howard and Rhonita’s seven children on November 3,
2019.
298. 	But on November 4, 2019, everything shifted “in the family dynamics.”488
299. 	“T.M. is now the oldest boy” 489 because his mother, older brother (H.M. Jr.), older
sister (K.B.M.) and youngest brother and sister (T.A.M. and T.G.M.) were, with wanton
indifference to human life, murdered by the Defendant.
484 https://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm
485 $10,400,000.00 x 4 as Howard Miller lost four children on November 4, 2019.
486 Declaration of Howard Miller, Ex. 30_000017
487 Testimony of Howard Miller, Tr. 188:15-16.
488 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 467:6-7.
489 Id. at Tr. 467:5-6.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 75 of 165

76
300. 	“T.M. [has] suffered the most”, “[a]nd he [has] suffered bad.”490 He was initially
“crying himself to sleep for hours. He didn’t want to sleep alone. Even if he fell asleep
alone, he would wake up and go” 491 “pounding, … screaming, yelling”492 on the door of
an adult’s bedroom door just to “crawl into the bed” 493 next to them.
301. 	These “nightmares” are in addition to his being “afraid all the time,” being “scared
to death at every noise” and his difficulty “coping” “when it gets dark.”494
302. 	In short, “[h]is sense of security is deep” and it is Dr. Schuurman’s expert opinion
that “ultimately, that type of anxiety is not going to serve him well.”495
303. 	It is Dr. Schuurman’s expert opinion that T.M. “is suffering from symptoms
consistent with [Post Traumatic Stress Disorder] PTSD … including recurrent distressing
dreams related to the traumatic series of events that killed his mother and siblings, intense
and persistent anxiety, and dissociative reactions. T.M. (like his father) appears to be
‘stuffing’ his feelings, and displaying anxiety, separation anxiety, and post-traumatic stress
symptoms. While these responses are understandable given what he has experienced, the
short-term as well as long-term impact will take a toll on his physical, emotional, and
mental health.”496
490 Testimony of Douglas Johnson, Tr. 420:14, 17.
491 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 468:1-3.
492 Id. at Tr. 420:21.
493 Id. at Tr. 420:24-25.
494 Id. at Tr. 468:4; 468:12-15.
495 Id. at Tr. 468:16:17.
496 Expert Report of Dr. Schuurman, Ex. 26_000012.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 76 of 165

77
304. 	T.M. has five distinct solatium claims—for the loss of his mother along with the
loss of four of his siblings murdered on November 4, 2019.
Havlish
solatium
values
Present Day solatium
values, accounting for
inflation (rounded to the
closest $100,000) 497
Present Day
solatium values,
accounting for
inflation
Child 	$8,500,000.00 	$10,400,000.00 	$10,400,000.00
Sibling 	$4,250,000.00 	$5,200,000.00 	$20,800,000.00498
Total 	$31,200,000.00
305. 	The Court addresses, infra., Plaintiffs’ request for an upward departure from these
figures for Plaintiff T.M. for the loss of his mother Maria Rhonita LeBaron and four of his
siblings. A similar request wil be discussed for each of the surviving children.
(c) A.M.
306. 	United States citizen499 and North Dakota resident 500 A.M. was born on April 22,
2014.501 She was the fourth oldest of Howard and Rhonita’s seven children.
307. 	Rhonita “played an important role in [A.M’s] life in terms of” “fostering … [her]
interests, but also for her physical challenges to make sure that she was doing everything
possible to help [A.M] be able to use her arm, her side of her body that has some
paralysis.”502
308. 	A.M. has “cerebral palsy”503 which is affecting “the whole left side of her body.”504
497 https://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm.
498 $5,200,000.00 x 4, as T.M. lost four siblings on November 4, 2019.
499 Declaration of Howard Miller, Ex. 30_000018.
500 Testimony of Howard Miller, Tr. 188:15-16.
501 Declaration of Howard Miller, Ex. 30, ¶ 10.
502 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 469:2-6.
503 Testimony of Howard Miller, Tr. 174:19.
504 Id. at Tr. 174:21.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 77 of 165

78
309. 	And on November 4, 2019, A.M. “lost her mother, her caretaker, her protector”,505
her oldest and youngest brothers and both of her sisters as a result of the depraved-evil
hearts of the Defendant.
310. 	Rhonita was supposed to be there for A.M. as she “gr[e]w developmentally,
everything from … all [her] successes, [her] recitals, [her] graduating from high school,
[her] first dates, [her] getting attracted to a boy”; she was supposed to be there at “her
wedding” and be a “grandmother” to A.M.’s children.506
311. 	A.M. will feel the pain and sorrow of her mother’s absence at all these events as
she grows up.507 And while she is surrounded by a loving community, “[t]here’s a
mother/daughter bond that no one else can completely fill.”508
312. 	Her loss will also, unfortunately, be compounded as she “struggle[s] with her
physical disabilities and being different” because “sometimes kids can bully,” “be cruel to
one another” or they may “just tease” her “as she goes through these different
developmental ages.”509
313. 	It is Dr. Schuurman’s expert opinion that A.M. “is going to need specialized
medical and psychological care as she grows up. Her mother was the driving force behind
getting the physical therapy she needs, and although other family members have worked
to help her, there is no substitute for her mother and her mother’s love. We know from
studies of ‘motherless daughters’ that she will experience, and does already experience,
estrangement from ‘feeling different’ from other girls who have their mothers. That,
505 Declaration of Adriana Jones, Ex. 46, ¶ 38.
506 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 469:19-25.
507 Id. at Tr. 470:1; see also Declaration of Howard Miller, Ex. 30, ¶ 55 (A.M. will miss her mother making “cheesy
potatoes for her birthday”).
508 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 470:3-4.
509 Id. at Tr. 470:5-12.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 78 of 165

79
combined with her physical challenges, has been extremely difficulty and will continue to
be an ongoing challenge as she grows through puberty and into adulthood.”510
314. 	A.M. has five distinct solatium claims—for the loss of her mother and four of her
siblings who were murdered on November 4, 2019.
(d) Z.M.
315. 	United States citizen513 and North Dakota resident514 Z.M. was born on September
22, 2016.515 He was fifth oldest of Howard and Rhonita’s children.
316. 	Z.M. was three years old when the Cartel brutally murdered his mother and four
brothers and sisters.
317. 	Following his mother’s and siblings’ funerals, Z.M. asked his grandmother,
Plaintiff Shalom Tucker, “Grandma, can we go and check and see if my mom’s in her room
now?”516 And due to his age, there is a common misconception that he did not or could not
510 Expert Report of Dr. Schuurman, Ex. 26_000013.
511 https://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm.
512 $5,200,000.00 x 4, as A.M. lost four siblings on November 4, 2019.
513 Declaration of Howard Miller, Ex. 30_000019.
514 Testimony of Howard Miller, Tr. 188:15-16.
515 Declaration of Howard Miller, Ex. 30, ¶ 10.
516 Testimony of Adriana Jones, Tr. 524:7-8.
Havlish
solatium
values
Present Day solatium
values, accounting for
inflation (rounded to the
closest $100,000) 511
Present Day solatium
values, accounting for
inflation
Child 	$8,500,000.00 	$10,400,000.00 	$10,400,000.00
Sibling 	$4,250,000.00 	$5,200,000.00 	$20,800,000.00512
Total 	$31,200,000.00
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 79 of 165

80
understand and recognize the gravity of what happened and what was going on, thus the
reason for the question.517
318. 	But as Dr. Schuurman testified, “if we as adults learned as many new words a day
as your average three-year-old, we’d all be geniuses. So while [Z.M. couldn’t] verbalize as
well” at three, he was certainty “observing” and “taking in what’s going” on.518
319. 	Irrespective of what Z.M. understood at “three, as he grows older, he will learn
more and more and understand better what happened to his mother and siblings.” 519 This
will lead, in Dr. Schuurman’s expert opinion, to a feeling of being “cheated” for Z.M. “as
opposed to [his] older siblings” because he will not “necessarily have memories of” his
other and siblings.520 “People can show photos and they can talk about [Z.M.’s] mother
and siblings,” but unlike T.M and A.M, Z.M will not “have the same memories.”521
320. 	It is Dr. Schuurman’s expert opinion that Z.M. “is incorporating the masculine
stereotype that ‘men don’t cry’ as well as the ‘revenge attitude’ of getting ‘the bad guys.’
Z.M. will need assistance to channel his anger and frustration in positive ways, as well as
getting nurturing that he would have received from his mother. Z.M. appears to have
internalized the ‘be strong’ and ‘keep it inside’ coping of his father and older brother T.M.,
and the research suggests that children who do so are at risk for greater adverse
outcomes.”522
321. 	It is also the expert opinion of Dr. Schuurman that the death of his brothers and
sisters “carries high risk factors for [Z.M.] to have psychological, emotional, and relational
517 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 470:15-21; Expert Report of Dr. Schuurman, Ex. 26_000013.
518 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 470:22-471:2.
519 Id. at Tr. 471:3-5.
520 Id. at Tr. 471:8-10.
521 Id. at Tr. 471:10-12
522 Expert Report of Dr. Schuurman,Ex. 26_000013.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 80 of 165

81
challenges throughout [his] lifetime[]. … Under these circumstances (horrific, mutilation
[,] destruction [of his family]), the risk for the development of traumatic memories, images,
and post-traumatic stress is elevated[ and] … is something [Z.M.] will struggle with as [he]
grow[s] into adolescence and adulthood.”523
322. 	Z.M. has five distinct claims for solatium—for the loss of his mother and four of
his siblings who were all killed on November 4, 2019:
(e) Adrian LeBaron-Soto and Bathseba Shalom Tucker
323. 	Adrian LeBaron-Soto and Batheseba Shalom Tucker are Maria Rhonita LeBaron’s
father and mother and H.M. Jr., K.B.M., T.M., A.M., Z.M., T.A.M and T.G.M.’s maternal
grandfather and grandmother.526
324. 	To Mr. LeBaron-Soto, his daughter “was perfect in every sense of the word. She
was intelligent, passionate, beautiful, honest and caring. [He] trusted Nita and her
judgment.”527 She was inquisitive, asked a lot of questions and that helped “buil[d] a very
strong relationship between [Mr. LeBaron-Soto] and [Rhonita].”528
523 Expert Report of Dr. Schuurman, Ex. 26_000014 (internal citation omitted).
524 https://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm.
525 $5,200,000.00 x 4, as Z.M. lost four siblings on November 4, 2019.
526 Declaration of Adrian LeBaron-Soto, Ex. 36, ¶ 2; Declaration of Bathsheba Shalom Tucker, Ex. 37, ¶ 3.
527 Declaration of Adrian LeBaron-Soto, Ex. 36, ¶ 8.
528 Testimony of Adrian LeBaron-Soto, Tr. 198:19-22.
Havlish
solatium
values
Present Day solatium
values, accounting for
inflation (rounded to the
closest $100,000) 524
Present Day solatium values,
accounting for inflation
Child 	$8,500,000.00 	$10,400,000.00 	$10,400,000.00
Sibling 	$4,250,000.00 	$5,200,000.00 	$20,800,000.00525
Total 	$31,200,000.00
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 81 of 165

82
325. 	Rhonita and her mother also had “a very special relationship.”529 Rhonita and Ms.
Tucker “would share secrets with one another.”530
326. 	“While Nita’s family was growing, she always reminded [her mother], her father
and her brothers and sisters how much she loved and cared about [them]. She would
surprise [them] with visits, call and leave voice mails just to tell [them] that she loved
[them] and was thinking about [them].”531
327. 	“Watching Nita grow as a mother was a blessing” to her mother who also stated
that to her daughter, “family was the single most important thing in the world.”532
328. 	The last time Mr. LeBaron-Soto saw his daughter was on her birthday, which also
happens to be Mexican Independence Day.533 Rhonita wanted to celebrate the day with her
father; so, they went to the local plaza where there was a ceremony and the band started
playing one of Mr. LeBaron-Soto’s favorite songs to which he and Rhonita danced and
laughed.534
329. 	On November 4, 2019, approximately three and a half hours away from La Mora
just outside of Colonia LeBaron,535 Mr. LeBaron-Soto and Ms. Tucker were together at a
gas station when they first learned that something may have gone wrong with Rhonita and
the kids.536
529 Declaration of Bathsheba Shalom Tucker, Ex. 37, ¶ 8
530 Id.
531 Id. at ¶ 13.
532 Id. at ¶¶ 14, 16.
533 Declaration of Adrian LeBaron-Soto, Ex. 36, ¶ 20.
534 Testimony of Adrian LeBaron-Soto, Tr. 199:11 – 200:2; Declaration of Adrian LeBaron-Soto, Ex. 36, Exhibit D.
535 Testimony of Kenneth Miller, Tr. 44:2.
536 Testimony of Adrian LeBaron-Soto, Tr. 200:10-23.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 82 of 165

83
330. 	“Immediate disbelief and shock set in.”537 “It was like hitting a brick wall.”538 Mr.
LeBaron-Soto and Ms. Tucker “immediately began driving to where” their daughter and
grandchildren had last been seen and known to be traveling.539 However, due to the security
concerns they were twice stopped and the drive which should “have taken three hours …
ended up taking an agonizing 8+ hours.”540
331. 	During this time, Mr. LeBaron-Soto and Ms. Tucker had seen the videos and heard
the audio WhatsApp messages541 of what had happened to their daughter and grandchildren
in the mountains and had received phone calls from their children pleading with them not
to go542 ; Mr. LeBaron-Soto’s response to it all – “if [you] wanted to pray for [me], [] pray
for [me] but [] [I] [am] going to get [my] baby girl.”543 Ms. Tucker’s response – “We have
to do it. We have to go in there. Nobody else is going to go get them. Nobody else is going
to, we have to go.” 544 They “were going in regardless the cost to save [their] family.”545
332. 	Because of the direction they were traveling, the first scene they arrived at was
where Christina, Dawna, T.L. and R.L. had been murdered and it was like “a scene from
the worst horror movie [one] could imagine. Christina’s door was open, and she was lying
in a pool of blood, dead in the middle of the road.”546
537 Declaration of Adrian LeBaron-Soto, Ex. 36, ¶ 21.
538 Declaration of Bathsheba Shalom Tucker, Ex. 37, ¶ 21.
539 Id.
540 Declaration of Adrian LeBaron-Soto, Ex. 36, ¶ 22.
541 Video taken by Kenny Miller “Nita is Shot Up”, Ex. 8; Testimony of Adrian LeBaron-Soto, Tr. 202:6-22;
WhatsApp from Kenny Miller, “Julian call Nitas Parents”, Ex. 74.
542 Testimony of Adriana Jones, Tr. 508:11-12.
543 Id. at 508:12-14.
544 Id. at 508:16-18.
545 Declaration of Bathsheba Shalom Tucker, Ex. 37, ¶ 24.
546 Declaration of Adrian LeBaron-Soto, Ex. 36, ¶ 26; Family Photos of Christina Langford Attack Scene, Ex. 20.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 83 of 165

84
333. 	After a short time at the scene of Christina and Dawna’s attack on the “[p]itch black,
no moon” 547 evening around approximately 11:00p.m., Mr. LeBaron-Soto and Ms. Tucker
arrived “at Nita’s car and what [they] couldn’t see, [they] could feel. [They] could feel, and
smell the horrible crime scene. [They] could feel the death and destruction that had
bestowed [their] family. From that moment [Mr. LeBaron-Soto’s] life was shattered.”548
334. 	Ms. Tucker continues to this day to smell “the fire and smoke” emanating from her
family’s remains and vehicle that evening.549
335. 	Mr. LeBaron-Soto and Ms. Tucker were soon thereafter asked by authorities to
leave the scene that evening550 and believed that they were prepared to see the scene in the
day light— they were not.551
336. 	Mr. LeBaron-Soto described that what he saw “was horrible, it was sickening; [he]
cannot imagine a more gruesome scene for a father and family to have to encounter and
because of [his, and his family’s] religious beliefs and the authorities inaction – [he], [his]
wife and family were forced to do the unconscionable, collect [their] families bones and
ashes.”552
337. 	Mr. LeBaron-Soto and Ms. Tucker had to try to “piece-by-piece, bone-by-bone,
collect [their] daughter and grandchildren.”553
547 Testimony of David Langford, Tr. 340:10.
548 Declaration of Adrian LeBaron-Soto, Ex. 36, ¶31; see Family Photos of Miller Attack Scene (Evening), Ex. 19;
Declaration of Bathsheba Shalom Tucker, Ex. 37_000027-32.
549 Declaration of Bathsheba Shalom Tucker, Ex. 37, ¶ 36.
550 Declaration of Adrian LeBaron-Soto, Ex. 36, ¶ 34; Declaration of Bathsheba Shalom Tucker, Ex. 37, ¶ 39.
551 Id. at ¶¶ 35, 36.
552 Declaration of Adrian LeBaron-Soto, Ex. 36, ¶ 37; Testimony of Adrian LeBaron-Soto, Tr. 223:7-10; see also
Declaration of Adrian LeBaron-Soto, Ex. 36_000046-63; Family Photos of Miller Attack Scene (Day), Ex. 18.
553 Declaration of Bathsheba Shalom Tucker, Ex. 37, ¶ 41, Ex. 37_000034-51.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 84 of 165

85
338. 	“Worse yet, it appears as if Nita and the kids knew they were going to die. H.M. Jr.
was found half-in/half-out of the vehicle. … K.B.M. knew of and appreciated the danger
she and her family were in.”554
339. 	Ms. Tucker could not process then, nor can she today, “the fear [her family] felt
and the pain that they endured. It breaks [Ms. Tucker’s] heart thinking about this. At the
same time, [Ms. Tucker] can’t not think about what happened and how it happened.”555
340. 	This horrible nightmare got even darker for Mr. LeBaron-Soto and his family
because once they collected Rhonita and the children’s bones and ashes, they cleaned and
prepared their bodies for burial.556
341. 	And just when it could not get any worse, Howard’s father said “the saddest
thing”557 at the funeral – there were no bodies left “to touch, dress and kiss one last time;
the sicarios [the Defendant] and their calloused evil stole” that from him and his family.558
342. 	Mr. LeBaron-Soto feels as though he “died on th[e] mountain”559 with Rhonita and
his grandchildren and in order to deal with that, he feels “compelled to act on behalf of
[his] daughter and all who were killed.”560
343. 	His compulsion, however, according to Dr. Schuurman does not, and will not,
shield him from “more depressive symptoms, poorer wellbeing, more health problems and
554 Id. at ¶¶ 43, 44.
555 Id. at ¶ 45.
556 Testimony of Adrian LeBaron-Soto, Tr. 224:20-24; see Photos of Miller Family Remains Taken by Douglas
Johnson, Ex. 73; Declaration of Bathsheba Shalom Tucker, Ex. 37_000057.
557 Testimony of Adrian LeBaron-Soto, Tr. 225:24.
558 Declaration of Adrian LeBaron-Soto, Ex. 36, ¶ 42; Ex. 76.
559 Id. at ¶ 40.
560 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 482:19-21.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 85 of 165

86
more marital conflict.”561 It is Dr. Schuurman’s expert opinion, that Mr. LeBaron-Soto is
at risk for “enduring stress” and “anxiety”.562
344. 	Dr. Schuurman further stated that, in her opinion, she does not “think there’s really
anything worse for a mother or a father than having a child die in such a horrific way.”563
Ms. Tucker has “suffered from nightmares and trouble sleeping and trouble regulating
emotion and anger, and all of those things … can be really challenging.”564
345. 	The sights and smells Mr. LeBaron-Soto and Ms. Tucker endured as two of the first
individuals to see both attack scenes, given that it was their family must have been of
unconscionable weight and disturbance.
346. 	There is no question, based on the moving testimony, affidavits, expert reports, and
evidence submitted in this case, that Mr. LeBaron-Soto and Ms. Tucker were close with
their daughter and grandchildren and that they miss them greatly. Plaintiffs submit that it
was agonizingly painful for Mr. LeBaron-Soto and Ms. Tucker to 1) see, smell and feel the
scene of where their family was massacred; 2) have to collect their family’s remains and
ashes from the scene and 3) have to clean and prepare their families remains for burial.
347. 	Furthermore, compounding their pain, Mr. LeBaron-Soto and Ms. Tucker initially
believed their family was kidnapped, thus they were forced not only “to cope with the grief
that follows the loss of a loved one, but—at the time of the event—w[ere] also forced to
endure unending anxiety and an extended period of extreme distress over the health and
safety of their captive family member[s].”565
561 Id. at 483:22-24.
562 Id. at 484:7-16.
563 Id. at 482:7-9.
564 Id. at 482:10-13.
565 Warmbier, 356 F.Supp.3d at 59 (internal citation and quotations omitted).
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 86 of 165

87
348. 	Since Rhonita and her children’s death, Mr. LeBaron-Soto has followed a path of
advocacy for victims of cartel violence to cope with his grief—what Dr. Schuurman called
“instrumental” coping.566 	This advocacy places him in (bodily) danger and causes his
family to worry about him constantly.567 Mr. LeBaron-Soto has also acknowledged that
the attacks have affected his relationship with his wife, Shalom, and his other children.568
He thinks about Rhonita and his grandchildren a lot, especially knowing H.M. Jr. tried to
escape the car—the whole thing is very powerful over him.569
349. 	Having examined closely the facts of this particular case, Mr. LeBaron-Soto and
Ms. Tucker should be awarded solatium damages in line with those issued in Warmbier v.
Democratic People’s Rep. of Korea, 356 F. Supp. 3d 20, 59 (D.D.C. 2018), adjusted for
inflation.570 The values in Warmbier for parent solatium claims was $15,000,000.00, and
adjusted for the 12% inflation since the Warmbier case was decided, the Court awards
solatium damages in the amount of $16,800,000.00 each to Adrian LeBaron-Soto and
Bathseba Shalom Tucker for the loss of their daughter Maria Rhonita LeBaron on
November 4, 2019. No request for an upward departure has been requested for these
awards.
(f) Rhonita’s Siblings— Rholena “Lian” Johnson, Melissa Conklin,
Adriana 	Jones, 	Laura 	LeBaron, 	William 	LeBaron, 	Ruthila
LeBaron, Dayer LeBaron, Miguel LeBaron, Javier LeBaron, and
Matthew LeBaron
350. 	As stated supra, Rhonita Maria LeBaron’s ten siblings are Plaintiffs in this case—
Rholena Lian Johnson, Melissa Conklin, Adriana Jones, Laura Corina LeBaron, William
566 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 482:14-22.
567 Testimony of Adrian LeBaron-Soto, Tr. 231:5-25, 232:1-9.
568 Id.
569 Id. at Tr. 232:10-14.
570 Inflation has risen approximately 12% since Warmbier was decided in December 2018 to February 2022.
https://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 87 of 165

88
LeBaron, Ruthila LeBaron, Dayer LeBaron, Miguel LeBaron, Javier LeBaron, and
Matthew LeBaron.
351. 	There is not enough ink “to somehow express the relationships” between Rhonita
and each of her siblings “because they were so deep, and [the LeBaron’s] just are a really
united family that saw each other often. That made the effort to be with each other all the
time. That talked to each other every day.” 571
352. 	Rhonita and her siblings shared many experiences. Rhonita and her sisters shared
many memories such as, shared pregnancies.572 They “told each other everything, and
always discussed” their hopes and dreams.573 Lian, Melissa, Adriana, Corina, Ruthila, and
Rhonita were each other’s “best friends.”574
353. 	Rhonita and her brothers had “an unspoken bond and connection”.575 Rhonita also
helped her mother raise her younger brothers.576 She and her brothers “did almost
everything together—school, chores, work and play.”577
354. 	Rhonita’s siblings were scattered all over the globe on November 4, 2019, when
they learned Rhonita and the children “had been brutally murdered.”578 Lian and Matthew
were in Colonia LeBaron579 ; Melissa and Ruthila were in Utah580 ; Adriana was in Canada
for her 20th wedding anniversary581 ; Corina was in Minnesota582 ; William was in Italy
571 Testimony of Adriana Jones, Tr. 500:7-10.
572 Declaration of Rholena Lian Johnson, Ex. 47, ¶ 9; Testimony of Adriana Jones, Tr. 496:18-22.
573 Declaration of Laura Corina LeBaron, Ex. 39, ¶ 5.
574 Id. at ¶ 3; Declaration of Ruthila LeBaron, Ex. 44 ¶ 7.
575 Declaration of William LeBaron, Ex. 41 ¶ 5.
576 Testimony of Dayer LeBaron, Tr. 89:22 – 90:22; Declaration of Miguel LeBaron, Ex. 40, ¶¶ 4-5; Declaration of
Javier LeBaron, Ex. 42, ¶ 4; Declaration of Matthew LeBaron, Ex. 38, ¶ 7.
577 Declaration of William LeBaron, Ex. 41 ¶ 4.
578 Declaration of Rholena Lian Johnson, Ex. 47, ¶ 21.
579 Id ; Declaration of Matthew LeBaron, Ex. 38, ¶ 6.
580 Declaration of Melissa Conklin, Ex. 45, ¶ 12; Declaration of Ruthila LeBaron, Ex. 44 ¶ 11.
581 Testimony of Adriana Jones, Tr. 506:7-8, Declaration of Adriana Jones, Ex. 46, ¶ 16.
582 Declaration of Laura Corina LeBaron, Ex. 39, ¶ 10.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 88 of 165

89
celebrating his mother-in-law’s 60th birthday583 ; Dayer was in Texas584 ; and Miguel and
Javier were in Colorado585 . They all rushed to La Mora, Mexico to be together as a family
and to be the “first responders” they had grown up to be.586
355. 	There was a lot of confusion in the beginning, no one really knowing what had
happened. At first, they were unsure if “Nita and the kids had been taken hostage”. 587 As
time passed, the gravity of the situation became clear.588
356. 	As they pieced together the information from WhatsApp messages589 and began to
arrive at the scene, they all learned the gruesome and “horrific”590 nature of the murders of
their sister, nieces, and nephews—they were shot at by countless Cartel members and
intentionally burned alive.591
357. 	After the bodies of Rhonita and the children were collected from the scene by the
LeBarons, each sibling assisted in the preparation of the bodies for the funeral—cleaning
the bones and/or assisting in constructing caskets, and placing Rhonita, H.M. Jr., K.B.M.,
T.A.M. and T.G.M.’s remains into their caskets.592
583 Declaration of William LeBaron, Ex. 41, ¶ 9.
584 Declaration of Dayer LeBaron, Ex. 43, ¶ 11.
585 Declaration of Miguel LeBaron, Ex. 40, ¶¶ 16-17; Declaration of Javier LeBaron, Ex. 42, ¶ 12.
586 Testimony of Adriana Jones, Tr. 508:19-24.
587 Declaration of Adriana Jones, Ex. 36, ¶ 17; Testimony of Dayer LeBaron, Tr. 77:10-15; Declaration of Matthew
LeBaron, Ex. 38, ¶ 10.
588 Declaration of Ruthila LeBaron, Ex. 44 ¶ 11.
589 Id. at¶ 14; Declaration of William LeBaron, Ex. 41, ¶ 11; Declaration of Melissa Conklin, Ex. 45, ¶ 13;
Declaration of Rholena Lian Johnson, Ex. 47, ¶ 21.
590 Declaration of Miguel LeBaron, Ex. 40, ¶ 14.
591 Testimony of Dr. Schubl, Tr. 156:9; 160:1; Declaration of Matthew LeBaron, Ex. 38, ¶ 10; Rhonita LeBaron
1006 Summary Chart, Ex. 14; Mexican Government Apostille 2 Ex. 4 T_000153.
592 Testimony of Douglas Johnson, Tr. 417:23-418:5; Declaration of Melissa Conklin, Ex. 45, ¶ 14; Testimony of
Adriana Jones, Tr. 515: 3-7, 16-21; Declaration of Laura Corina LeBaron, Ex. 39, ¶ 12; Declaration of William
LeBaron, Ex. 41, ¶ 12; Declaration of Ruthila LeBaron, Ex. 44 ¶ 15; Testimony of Dayer LeBaron, Tr. 117:10;
Declaration of Miguel LeBaron, Ex. 40, ¶ 19; Declaration of Matthew LeBaron, Ex. 38, ¶ 14.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 89 of 165

90
358. 	Every day since, Lian’s husband sees the pain in her eyes593 as the November 4,
2019, massacre has “changed everything” forever.594 Lian now only travels “during
daylight hours” and lives in constant fear of “being kidnapped and held for ransom.” 595
359. 	Melissa recalled a Christmas family tradition, and how it changed after the murders:
“Every Christmas, to open a present, you have to sing. We always would go in age order.
In 2019, the first Christmas without her, her absence was profoundly felt. As we passed
around the mic that morning, my younger brother did not have his little sister, Rhonita, to
sing after him. Every Christmas it is a reminder of her murder and the piece that is missing
in our family.” 596
360. 	In describing her grief after losing Rhonita and the children, Adriana testified: “So
now there's all this, ‘How do we be more like Nita,’ you know. How do we -- how do we
rise above our grief and that just paralyzing grief to be present in these moments because
they matter so much. And we know we could be gone tomorrow, like, we really, really
know, but it's so hard to rise above what you're feeling in that moment to be present for
them.”597
361. 	Corina now lives “in constant fear” which has resulted in her inability to be “the
mother or wife” she needs to be for her family, and her to “wonder what the point of
dreaming is when it all can end so suddenly.”598
362. 	The deaths have affected William’s own relationships—he treasures them more but
is afraid to burden his wife “with his emotions.”599 As William stated: “I am able to still be
593 Id. at Tr. 422:4.
594 Declaration of Rholena Lian Johnson, Ex. 47, ¶ 26
595 Id. at ¶¶ 27, 28.
596 Declaration of Melissa Conklin, Ex. 45, ¶ 10.
597 Testimony of Adriana Jones, Tr. 504:3-9.
598 Declaration of Corina LeBaron, Ex. 39, ¶¶ 19, 20.
599 Declaration of William LeBaron, Ex. 41, ¶¶ 18-19.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 90 of 165

91
present with my children, but their relationship with other family members have changed.
Not only did they lose an aunt and cousins, but they also lost their relationship with their
grandparents. It is something that upsets me whenever I think about it.”600
363. 	Ruthila describes losing her “better half”601 and believes that she has yet to “fully
grieve” what happened because “[i]t is a daily pain” she lives with but the guilt is profound,
and wallowing in sadness is inescapable.602
364. 	Since November 4, 2019, Dayer has felt “unimaginable pain and just sadness from
deep inside [his] soul”603 leaving him unable to “get a good night’s sleep. [He] would have
to watch TV until [he] fell asleep. If [he] turned the TV off” he would “just start thinking
about [the attack] and sometimes be up until four in the morning just contemplating what
had occurred.” 604
365. 	As Miguel put it, “[t]o this day, I still feel profound sadness and grief over her
death. 	I find it hard to think about memories I had with her, as it makes me feel sad to
know I will never make another memory with her. 	Every time I try to talk about her, I
choke up and want to cry…”605
366. 	Javier and Rhonita were “extremely close” and in constant communication.606 After
her death, and to this day, he continues to face “psychological, emotional, and relational
challenges,”607 as discussed by Dr. Schuurman.
600 Id. ¶ 20.
601 Declaration of Ruthila LeBaron, Ex. 44 ¶ 7.
602 Id. at ¶ 17.
603 Testimony of Dayer LeBaron, Tr. 77:18-21.
604 Id. at Tr. 122:2-6.
605 Declaration of Miguel LeBaron, Ex. 40, ¶ 25.
606 Declaration of Javier LeBaron, Ex. 42, ¶¶ 4, 7.
607 Expert Report of Dr. Schuurman, Ex. 26_000014.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 91 of 165

92
367. 	And Matthew, the youngest of Rhonita’s siblings, no longer has his “second
mother”608 who “frequently checked” on him to make sure he was pursuing his dreams. 609
368. 	The Defendant’s depraved murder of Rhonita, H.M. Jr., K.B.M., T.G.M., and
T.A.M. has “broke[n] the root of [their] support system” and caused “profound sadness”610
that each one of them feel each and every day.
369. 	Dr. Schuurman, in her expert report, states that “[l]osing a sibling means the loss
of a companion, confidante, role model, and friend. Siblings’ identities are intricately
connected because they share similar histories so that when of them dies, the survivors
essentially lose part of themselves.”611
370. 	The Havlish value for solatium damages for a sibling is $4,250,000.00, and adjusted
for inflation,612 this amount rises to $5,200,000.00.
371. 	Difficult as it may be, “[b]efore plaintiffs can be awarded any relief” it is the
obligation of the Court to ensure that Plaintiffs have “establish[ed] their claims by evidence
satisfactory to the [C]ourt.”613
372. 	As shown infra, all ten of Rhonita LeBaron siblings have established their claims
and each shall be awarded the relief they seek.
373. 	The Court addresses, infra., Plaintiffs’ request for an upward adjustment from these
figures for Plaintiffs Rholena “Lian” Johnson, Melissa Conklin, Adriana Jones, Laura
Corina LeBaron, William LeBaron, Ruthila LeBaron, Dayer LeBaron, Miguel LeBaron,
Javier LeBaron, and Matthew LeBaron for the loss of their sister Maria Rhonita LeBaron.
608 Declaration of Matthew LeBaron, Ex. 38, ¶ 3.
609 Id. at ¶ 9.
610 Declaration of Melissa Conklin, Ex. 45, ¶ 16-18.
611 Expert Report of Dr. Schuurman, Ex. 26_000018 (internal citation and quotations omitted).
612 Inflation has risen approximately 23% since Havlish was decided in July 2012 to February 2022.
https://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm.
613 Flanagan , 87 F.Supp.3d at 114.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 92 of 165

93
(2) Family of Christina Langford
(a) Tyler Johnson
374. 	When Plaintiff Tyler Edward Johnson first met Christina Langford, she “captured”
him with her beauty and presence, Mr. Johnson would later say that it was “love at first
sight.”614 Their love for one another grew exponentially quickly, and after just a few short
months of dating, they were engaged and married.615
375. 	On February 14, 2007,616 before “[b]etween one and two hundred” people at Mr.
Johnson’s mother’s house in Mexico, Tyler and Christina were married.617 This year, 2022,
would have been Tyler and Christina’s fifteenth (15) wedding anniversary.
376. 	The District Court for the County of Cass, North Dakota recognized this marriage
and “declared” on October 11, 2021, that Mr. Johnson is “the common law spouse of the
decedent Christina Marie Langford.”618 Tyler was subsequently “appointed Personal
Representative of the Estate of Christina Marie Langford.”619
377. 	Shortly after their wedding Tyler and Christina moved to Missouri where he
worked “doing dry wall finishing on an Air Force base.”620 It was not all work and no fun
though, as Tyler and Christina enjoyed camping, hiking, and fishing together. Christina
may have been a better fisherman than Tyler, but as long as they were together and
outdoors, they were happy.621
614 Testimony of Tyler Johnson, Tr. 354:2-5.
615 Id. at Tr. 354:6-9.
616 Id. at Tr. 354:9.
617 Testimony of Amelia Sedgwick, Tr. 240:20-25.
618 Declaration of Tyler Johnson, Ex. 31_000013 (Judgment of Cass County District Court).
619 Id. at Ex. 31_000016 (Letters of Administration).
620 Testimony of Tyler Johnson, Tr. 355:7.
621 Id. at Tr. 355:15 – 356:14.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 93 of 165

94
378. 	Their happiness went to new levels one week shy of their first wedding
anniversary—February 7, 2008—when their first child, their baby girl, C.J., was born.622
Tyler and Christina would proceed to have a total of six (6) children together—J.J., a boy
born on January 18, 2010; T.J. Jr., a boy born on July 24, 2012; H.J. a boy born on February
4, 2015; E.J. a boy born on March 1, 2017; F.M.J. a girl born on April 9, 2019. 623 Because
they were both from big families, it was important to Tyler and Christina to have a large
family of their own; Christina “wanted to have as many kids as God would send her.”624
379. 	Tyler worked in North Dakota and various other states, on the oil fields or doing
construction, in order to provide for his family and allow Christina to be a stay-at-home,
“very loving mother” to their children.625 Christina’s love for their children was “fierce.”626
She was protective of their children, she “wanted [their] children to learn to be obedient
and to be responsible and to love one another and to know God. Wanted them to be good
people. She wanted to teach them that. She homeschooled them and didn’t like them
watching TV. She didn’t want them playing video games. She didn’t want them eating junk
food.”627 Christina was “[v]ery, very attentive” to the needs of her children.628
380. 	In 	the 	weeks 	before 	the 	November 	4, 	2019 	massacre, 	Tyler 	was 	making
arrangements so that he and his family could start their new lives together in North
Dakota.629 This included, among other things: renting a house, furnishing it and, organizing
622 Declaration of Tyler Johnson, Ex. 31, ¶ 9.
623 Id. at ¶ 10.
624 Testimony of Tyler Johnson, Tr. 358:17-20.
625 Id. at Tr. 352:1-7, Tr. 355:6-14; Declaration of Tyler Johnson, Ex. 31, ¶¶ 11, 16-17.
626 Testimony of Amelia Sedgwick, Tr. 242:9-10.
627 Id. at Tr. 242:10-15.
628 Id. at Tr. 242:19-20.
629 Id. at Tr. 361:20-24.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 94 of 165

95
a business to make sure that he had a job and that his family would be provided for when
they made the move.630
381. 	Tyler returned to Colonia LeBaron in the latter part of October 2019 to harvest the
pecans in their orchard before he and his family moved to North Dakota.631 It was in this
orchard on November 4, 2019, where the terror for Tyler first began 632 with the
bombardment of questions such as: “have you heard from your wife?”, “where is
Christina?”, “did Christina get there to LeBaron?” 	“Where’s Christina, have you texted
her, has she called you, it’s been a while.” 633
382. 	Trying on the exterior to remain calm, the alarm bells and panic inside Tyler were
going off as his WhatsApp messages and calls to Christina “weren’t going through.” This
terror would metastasize into a five-alarm fire as minutes felt like hours 634 for Tyler as he
soon learned that “Rhonita and her kids had been killed.”635
383. 	Tyler did everything he could imagine to try and locate his wife and daughter,
F.M.J. (who was traveling with Christina because she was still nursing at the time). He sent
additional messages, he tried to track the vehicle using its built-in OnStar system and he
even tried calling the government for answers and help.636 But while sitting on the balcony
at his mother’s house, Tyler learned where they were and what had happened as he
overheard an audio message to his mother which said, “Christina and her baby are dead.”637
630 Id. at Tr. 362:6-15.
631 Id. at Tr. 362:21-363:1; Declaration of Tyler Johnson, Ex. 31, ¶ 24.
632 Testimony of Tyler Johnson, Tr. 365:21-24.
633 Id. at Tr. 366:3-15; Declaration of Tyler Johnson, Ex. 31, ¶ 25.
634 Declaration of Tyler Johnson, Ex. 31, ¶ 27.
635 Testimony of Tyler Johnson, Tr. 366:12-24.
636 Id. at Tr. 367:7-126.
637 Id. at Tr. 367:20-368:6.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 95 of 165

96
384. 	Tyler immediately stood up, “exited off the balcony,” “went and gathered all [his]
children” and “locked [himself and his children] in the closet in one of the bedrooms and
just fell apart.”638 But his children did not know why their father was deteriorating before
their eyes, so he had to tell them that the unimaginable had occurred and that their mother
and sister were dead as a result.639
385. 	Through the darkness, there was light as Tyler learned, “a good three hours”640
later, that his daughter, F.M.J. was not dead but in-fact, she was alive.641 Due to the pain
and chaos of the day, however, Tyler was skeptical and “didn’t want to get [his] hopes up”
so he asked for proof, which he received via a “selfie” of Shalom Tucker holding F.M.J.642
386. 	F.M.J. was left alone, strapped in her bullet-riddled car seat for “a good eight, nine
hours” without food and water, but she was alive, and when Mr. Johnson finally saw her a
few days later, “[i]t was probably one of the happiest moments” of his life. When held her
in his arms he “felt more joy that [he] probably [has] ever felt”.643
387. 	Before being reunited with his youngest daughter, Tyler stopped at the scene644
where his wife had been murdered, and after the gravity of the situation passed and his
clarity was regained, Tyler needed to answer two overarching questions.
388. 	First, he wanted to determine where the Cartel unleashed their hail of bullets and
based upon “the way it looked on [Christina’s] vehicle it definitely showed that the bullets
came from high above on the right. All of the bullets came in from an angle on the right
638 Id. at 368:21-25.
639 Declaration of Tyler Johnson, Ex. 31, ¶ 31.
640 Testimony of Tyler Johnson, Tr. 375:24.
641 Declaration of Tyler Johnson, Ex. 31, ¶ 32.
642 Id.; Testimony of Tyler Johnson, Tr. 369:12-16; Family Photo of Shalom Tucker and F.M.J., Ex. 22.
643 Testimony of Tyler Johnson, Tr. 375:21-376:1.
644 Mexican Government Apostille 2, Ex. 4_000319, 320, 324, 328.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 96 of 165

97
passenger’s side.”645 So, he hiked up the mountainside—this is after Mexican authorities
had processed the scene—and found where the Cartel fired their bullets upon his wife and
daughter. Tyler testified that he continued to find bullet casings and rounds for months
after the attack on this hillside.646
389. 	Second, Mr. Johnson wanted to determine if this was an accident i.e., could the
Defendant determine from where they shot whether it was a woman and child in Christina’s
vehicle. Tyler measured the distance from where the shots were fired to Christina’s vehicle
to be approximately 140 – 175 yards647 , a distance consistent with the Mexican authorities’
findings,648 and from this distance one could “very clearly” “see who was in the vehicles
and if it was women and children.” 649
390. 	Back in La Mora, “Christina needed to be embalmed because her body began to
decompose quickly, and her funeral was not set to be held for another few days.”650 Mr.
Johnson “didn’t think that the first time [he and his wife] went in a helicopter ride would
be” so that Christina could be embalmed.651
391. 	Following Christina’s funeral, Mr. Johnson has “lost interest in a lot of things;” he
doesn’t “want to go to [his] farms” or “to golf” because “[i]t’s hard to find joy in things
following the attack. These days, [he is] just trying to keep it together for [his] kids and to
help them move forward.”652
645 Testimony of Tyler Johnson, Tr. 373:17-20.
646 Id. at Tr. 373:21-374:7.
647 Id. at Tr. 375:5-10.
648 Christina Langford 1006 Summary Chart, Ex. 12_000001.
649 Testimony of Tyler Johnson, Tr. 375:10-11.
650 Declaration of Tyler Johnson, Ex. 31, ¶ 38.
651 Testimony of Tyler Johnson, Tr. 376:24-25, 377:1
652 Id. at ¶¶ 46, 47.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 97 of 165

98
392. 	Mr. Johnson’s “pain is palpable.”653 “He has regret and guilt about why he let
Christina go back to get the passports rather than doing it himself,” he plays the
“woulda/coulda/shoulda stuff all the time”, and it is Dr. Schuurman’s expert opinion that
Mr. Johnson “is experiencing symptoms of PTSD” as well as “Major Depressive Disorder,
including loss of energy, diminished interest in activities (known as anhedonia), depressed
mood, feelings of detachment from others, persistent inability to experience positive
emotions, and self-blame.”654
393. 	At trial, Tyler testified:
I miss just having someone, a companion, someone around to talk to,
confide in. Someone to help me raise my kids and I miss her, her smile. Just
being able to -- I really miss listening to her play the piano. It's one of my
favorite things is just to lay on the couch and fall asleep while she plays the
piano; she played the most beautiful music. I miss seeing her with my kids
and how she treated them, how she loved them so much. The attention she
would give them and the patience she had with them.655
394. 	After Christina’s death, Tyler has tried to make special events more important,
knowing his children are missing their mom.656
395. 	“Considering the extraordinarily tragic circumstances”657 surrounding the murder
of Mr. Johnson’s wife on November 4, 2019, and following a thorough review of his
declaration, his testimony, testimony of his mother-in-law and Dr. Schuurman’s expert
report; Plaintiffs submit that Mr. Johnson has suffered, and will continue to suffer, “the
exact sort of acute feeling of permanent loss or change caused by [Christina’s] absence that
warrants an upward departure” from the standard Havlish valuation.658
653 Expert Report of Dr. Schuurman, Ex. 26_000014.
654 Id. at 000014-15
655 Testimony of Tyler Johnson, Tr. 381:12-23.
656 Id. at Tr. 359:21 - 360:1.
657 Havlish, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 110673, at *105-*106.
658 Oveissi, 768 F. Supp. 2d at 29-30.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 98 of 165

99
396. 	The Havlish value for solatium damages for a spouse is $12,500,000.00, and
adjusted for inflation,659 this amount rises to $15,300,000.00.
397. 	The Court addresses, infra., Plaintiffs’ request for an upward adjustment from these
figures for Plaintiff Tyler Johnson for the loss of his wife Christina Langford and the belief
that he had lost his daughter F.M.J. in the attack.
(b) Solatium Damages for Tyler and Christina’s Six Children
398. 	On November 4, 2019, the Defendant not only brutally murdered Christina
Langford but it also stole approximately “50.2 years”660 of precious, beautiful moments
and memories that Christina and her children C.J., J.J., T.J. Jr., H.J., E.J., and F.M.J. would
have undoubtably shared and left these children motherless and “with continuing and
persistent symptoms of trauma and grief, including depression, anger, sadness, anxiety,
helplessness, and hopelessness.”661
399. 	While C.J., J.J., T.J. Jr., H.J., E.J., and F.M.J. may be experiencing/displaying
similar types of grief, every child has a “different personality,” is a different age, and
therefore, necessarily will, and does, have different amounts and types of grief.662
i. 	C.J.
400. 	Tyler and Christina’s children are “trying to hide their feelings and they’re trying
to act like they’re okay.”663 For example, C.J. “goes into the closet in her bedroom and
cries. She doesn’t want people to see her crying. She doesn’t want to show how she’s
feeling.”664 Dr. Schuurman testified that “there is a commonality in children that they want
659 Inflation has risen approximately 23% since Havlish was decided in July 2012 to February 2022.
https://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm.
660 Expert Report of Dr. Stan Smith, Ex. 27_000008.
661 Expert Report of Dr. Schuurman, Ex. 26_000010.
662 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 475:17.
663 Id. at Tr. 474:3-5.
664 Id. at Tr. 474:6-9.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 99 of 165

100
their parent to feel better. They don’t want to add to their pain. … So it's not unusual for
them to want to hide their feelings, to want to look like they’re okay because in their minds
often it’s, like, that’s a way I can be helpful.”665
401. 	In Dr. Schuurman’s expert opinion, C.J. is exhibiting symptoms “consistent with
PTSD including diminished interest in activities, feeling of detachment or estrangement
from others, avoidance, and dissociative reactions” which will “take a physical and
emotional toll on [C.J] over time.”666
402. 	C.J., who just turned 14 years old in February was once an upbeat girl, now
frequently breaks down and cries because she does not understand why this happened.667
She has been described as becoming very quiet and kind of numb since the attack.668 Ms.
Sedgwick, C.J.’s grandmother, described C.J. as becoming more introverted and shy, not
wanting to speak to anyone except her friends.669 Dr. Schuurman believes that C.J. does
not want to add to the burden that her father is feeling, and her way of doing that is hiding
her emotions.670 C.J. has also lost joy she used to find in playing piano, likely because of
the association it has to her mother.671 	Dr. Schuurman stated that C.J. seems to also be
suffering from the detachment and diminished interest Tyler is feeling.672
665 Id. at Tr. 474:15-23.
666 Expert Report of Dr. Schuurman, Ex. 26_000015, 17.
667 Declaration of Elizabeth Langford, Ex. 33 ¶ 16.
668 Expert Report of Dr. Schuurman, Ex. 26_000015; Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 474:5-11.
669 Declaration of Amelia Sedgwick, Ex. 32 ¶ 35; Testimony of Amelia Sedgwick, Tr. 258:11-23.
670 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 474:3-25.
671 Expert Report of Dr. Schuurman, Ex. 26_000015; Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 538:24-25, 539:1-2.
672 Id. at Tr. 475:1-12.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 100 of 165

101
ii. 	J.J.
403. 	J.J. was nine (9) years old when Christina was murdered,673 and he “was very
angry” following her death.674 He would “lose[] his temper [and], throw fits” frequently,
which in Dr. Schuurman’s expert opinion, is consistent with “PTSD, including irritable
behavior and angry outbursts, verbal and physical aggression toward others, problems with
concentration, reckless behavior, and depressed mood.” 675 Unfortunately, the difficulties
J.J. has faced, and the symptoms he is experiencing, have been made worse by “bullying
from other kids.”676 While J.J. appears to be doing better now, 677 finding constructive
channels to express his emotions will be a lifelong challenge for J.J.678
iii. T.J. Jr.
404. 	Like his older brother, T.J. Jr.—seven (7) years old when Christina was murdered—
has also been, following the death of his mother, teased by the other children and defiant
when given instruction;679 contrary to what his mother tried to teach him.680 In short, T.J.
Jr. has been a bit of “Dennis the Menace” in that he does things he knows that he should
not do but does them anyways irrespective the cost.681 As T.J. Jr. grows older, he will
experience “a recurring loss” “as literally a piece of [him] is missing that can’t be filled.”
Dr. Schuurman concluded that T.J. Jr. is at high risk for “PTSD, including diminished
673 Declaration of Amelia Sedgwick, Ex. 32, ¶ 36.
674 Testimony of Amelia Sedgwick, Tr. 258:25.
675 Expert Report of Dr. Schuurman, Ex. 26_000015.
676 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 475:23-24.
677 Testimony of Amelia Sedgwick, Tr. 259:3-12.
678 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 476:9-16.
679 Expert Report of Dr. Schuurman, Ex. 26_000015
680 Testimony of Amelia Sedgwick, Tr. 242:10-11 (Christina “wanted her children to learn to be obedient and to be
responsible”).
681 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 476:21-24.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 101 of 165

102
interest or participation in events, feelings of detachment or estrangement from others, and
reckless behavior.”682
iv. H.J.
405. 	“From everything that H.J. does and says, he shows [everyone] that he is very sad,
heartbroken. He was really attached to his mom … [and] [d]ifferent family members have
caught him in Tyler and Christina’s bedroom kissing a picture of his mom on various
occasions.”683 H.J., for the first several months following the attack, would not let his father
out of his sight because of the significant fear that he would not come back.684 Dr.
Schuurman opined that H.J. “is displaying symptoms of PTSD as outlined in the APA’s
guidelines for children 6 years and younger, including recurrent, involuntary, and intrusive
distressing memories of the traumatic death of his mother” “and dissociative reactions.”685
Such high levels of anxiety and need for security, as such an early age, if not properly
addressed may become chronic issues for H.J.686
v. 	E.J.
406. 	E.J. 	was 	two-years-old 	and 	“was 	very 	close 	to 	Christina” 	when 	she 	was
murdered.687 He “[a]lways had to be right next to Christina on her lap or tight next to her.
Wherever she was, she took him because he would not be left behind. And just having her
gone from one minute to the next” “after the funeral” was “heart wrenching just because
[E.J.] was so traumatized and he was so distraught. He just cried trying to let [his grand-
mother, Amelia Sedgwick] know that he wanted his mom.”688
682 Expert Report of Dr. Schuurman, Ex. 26_000016.
683 Declaration of Amelia Sedgwick, Ex. 32, ¶ 38.
684 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 477:18-20.
685 Expert Report of Dr. Schuurman, Ex. 26_000016.
686 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 477:21-23.
687 Testimony of Amelia Sedgwick, Tr. 260:16-17.
688 Id. at Tr. 260:18-25.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 102 of 165

103
407. 	E.J. grew angry with his grandmother because she “wouldn’t go get [his mother],
wouldn’t take him to her” and so, “the first night was an hour or two of him just crying and
crying and screaming and crying and [Ms. Sedgwick] just held him, wouldn’t let him go.
[Even though] [h]e wanted to just fight [Ms. Sedgwick] and run away. [She] wouldn’t let
him go. [She] just held him and cried with him until he finally tried to settle down a little
bit and went to sleep.”689
408. 	The issues and fears E.J. experience in the days and months immediately following
his mothers murder, persist to this day. “On a recent road trip, [E.J. and his family] stopped
at a store in Chihuahua where some National Guard vehicles and members had parked. E.J.
enter the store panicked that they were going to shoot him. Another time when [he] saw
the Federales (federal police) he asked, ‘are they going to shoot us?”690 It is Dr.
Schuurman’s expert opinion that “[a]lthough E.J. is young, he is acutely aware of what
happened to his mother and … is exhibiting anxiety and PTSD-related symptoms. While
his anxiety is in some ways well-founded, carrying that king of anxiety has potential long-
term physical and emotional harm.”691
vi. F.M.J.
409. 	F.M.J., who survived the attack in her carseat, similar to the other young children
affected, will have no memories of her mother, which will affect her throughout her
lifetime.692 F.M.J. does not remember her mother and sometimes refers to her grandmother,
Ms. Sedgwick, as mom.693 Dr. Schuurman also discussed that F.M.J.’s grief and suffering
689 Id. at Tr. 261:1-9.
690 Expert Report of Dr. Schuurman, Ex. 26_000016.
691 Id.
692 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 479: 12-14.
693 Declaration of Amelia Sedgwick, Ex. 32 ¶ 40; Testimony of Amelia Sedgwick, Tr. 261:17-25, 262:1-7.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 103 of 165

104
will be compounded by her coming to terms with the fact that she was involved in, and
survived, the attack.694 Dr. Schuurman explained that society can put pressure on “miracle
children,” such as F.M.J., to perform in ways that are not consistent with their
personality.695 It is something that will present itself as she gets older.696
410. 	Again, it bears mentioning that C.J., J.J., T.J. Jr., H.J., E.J., and F.M.J. were
between the ages of twelve and seven months when their mother was violently taken from
them. They no longer have the opportunity to build new memories with their mother or
have her present at their weddings, graduations, births of their children, or other key life
events. They will also no longer be able to experience the love, support, and guidance their
mother would provide for them.
411. 	As Dr. Schuurman stated in her report, “[t]here is no measure valid or reliable
enough to fully calculate the depth of the loss” these children “have experienced through
the traumatic murder[] of their mother. For the rest of their lives, they will grieve and miss
their mother’s presence and [her] affection, support, protection, comfort, care, advice,
assistance, solace, companionship. No one can fully ‘replace’ [Christina’s] role[] as
mother[] and caretaker[] for [her] children, no matter how much love and support surrounds
them. ”697
412. 	C.J., J.J., T.J. Jr., H.J., E.J., and F.M.J. each have distinct solatium claims arising
from the murder of their mother on November 4, 2019.
694 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 479:20-23.
695 Id. at Tr. 480:3-6.
696 Id. at Tr. 480: 3-11.
697 Expert Report of Dr. Schuurman, Ex. 26_000017.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 104 of 165

105
Havlish
solatium values
Present Day solatium values, accounting
for inflation (rounded to the closest
$100,000) 698
Child 	$8,500,000.00 	$10,400,000.00
413. 	The Court addresses, infra., Plaintiffs’ request for an upward departure from these
figures for Plaintiffs C.J., J.J., T.J. Jr., H.J., E.J., and F.M.J. for the loss of their mother
Christina Langford.
(c) Amelia Sedgwick
414. 	Plaintiff Amelia Sedgwick is Christina Langford’s mother.699 Ms. Sedgwick and all
her children—five of whom are Plaintiffs in this case (Estate of Christina Langford,
Elizabeth Langford, Serina Langford, Isaac Langford and E.L.)—are United States
Citizens.700
415. 	Christina was a “super happy,” “[f]un and mischievous” child growing up.701 As a
child, Christina liked to cut her own hair, help her mother with her brothers and sisters by
covering them, their “crib, the walls, everything, her[self]” with “diaper ointment.”702 But
she would help “sweep[] and mop[] the floors” afterwards because even at a young age
“[s]he was responsible.”703
698 Inflation has risen approximately 23% since Havlish was decided in July 2012 to February 2022.
https://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm.
699 Declaration of Amelia Sedgwick, Ex. 32, ¶ 4.
700 Testimony of Amelia Sedgwick, Tr. 234:20-21, 235:15-25; Amelia Sedgwick’s Children’s Passports, Ex. 15.
701 Id. at Tr. 237:4-6.
702 Id. at Tr. 237:7-11
703 Id. at Tr. 239:21-25.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 105 of 165

106
416. 	Christina fell “head-over-heels in love with [Tyler].”704 Shortly thereafter, on
February 14, 2007, Christina married “her first boyfriend”705 at Mr. Johnson’s parents’
house in Colonia LeBaron in a beautiful ceremony before 100-200 people.706
417. 	Fifty-one (51) weeks later, on February 7, 2008, Christina would give birth to her
first child C.J. and she and her mother would share an impactful, cathartic moment. Her
mother was present for the births of all of Christina’s children. 707
418. 	Ms. Sedgwick loved her grandchildren but her relationship with them “was
different then than it is now.”708 To say 2019 was a difficult year for Ms. Sedgwick and her
family would be an understatement but for the first ten (10) months of the year there was
one constant, Christina’s love and support.
419. 	In January 2019, Ms. Sedgwick’s son-in-law died in an unexpected plane crash and
“the pain of seeing [her] daughter suffer and [her] sons who were very, very close to Alvin
and Wesley who died that day was probably the hardest thing [Ms. Sedgwick] ever
experienced at that point in [her] life as a mother.”709 But Christina was there and “was so
supportive.”710
420. 	A few months later, Ms. Sedgwick’s husband and Christina’s father, contracted an
“intestinal flu” and died within moments of reaching the hospital.711 But again, Christina
was there. Every day “[s]he’d bounce through the door, ‘I’m here, Mom. What do you want
to do today? [W]hatever she did it was to cheer people up, to bring some sunshine, to bring
704 Declaration of Amelia Sedgwick, Ex. 32, ¶ 9.
705 Id.
706 Id. at ¶ 10; Testimony of Amelia Sedgwick, Tr. 240:19-25.
707 Id. at Tr. 242:7-8.
708 Id. at Tr. 242:24-25.
709 Id. at Tr. 243:16-244:1.
710 Id. at Tr. 244:5.
711 Id. at Tr. 244:9-18.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 106 of 165

107
something positive. To lend support and if [Ms. Sedgwick] wasn’t feeling good or was
down, she would put her arm around [Ms. Sedgwick] and say, ‘I’m so sorry, Mom.’”712
421. 	Ms. Sedgwick was the town schoolteacher in La Mora and on November 4, 2019,
at 10:00 a.m. school started.713 Shortly after it began, Ms. Sedgwick’s days of being a
teacher ended. Approximately twenty minutes into her lesson plan, someone ran into the
classroom and told Amelia “that there was a car, that it was burning and that it was
Rhonita’s vehicle.”714 	Ms. Sedgwick “tried to call [Christina] over WhatsApp, but she
didn’t answer.”715 She then reached out to Tyler and asked that he contact her if he heard
from Christina.716
422. 	The terror of anticipation lasted all day for Ms. Sedgwick until “around sundown”
when D.L. returned to La Mora and told everyone that his mother and Christina were
dead.717 When she learned her daughter had been murdered, and assumed F.M.J. was also
dead, Ms. Sedgwick was “devastated”718 because “when you lose one of your children, it’s
a whole different story.”719
423. 	A glimmer of hope arrived when the earlier reports of F.M.J’s death were
inaccurate. F.M.J. was alive—there was “joy” and “relief” on this most disastrous day.720
424. 	Christina was “loaded [] into the back of [a] pickup and carried” into Ms.
Sedgwick’s house, “into [her] room and laid” “on a table.” Ms. Sedgwick and her daughters
712 Id. at Tr. 244:25-245:7.
713 Declaration of Amelia Sedgwick, Ex. 32, ¶ 16.
714 Id.; Testimony of Amelia Sedgwick, Tr. 247:21-24.
715 Id. at Tr. 249:20-250:1.
716 Id.
717 Declaration of Amelia Sedgwick, Ex. 32, ¶ 24.
718 Testimony of Amelia Sedgwick, Tr. 251:10-11; 250:21.
719 Id. at Tr. 254:3-4.
720 Id. at Tr. 252:9-10.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 107 of 165

108
“cleaned [Christina] up and dressed her and combed her hair and washed her up….”721 Ms.
Sedgwick slept by Christina’s body that evening.722
425. 	Ms. Sedgwick has now assumed the role of “mother” to C.J., J.J., T.J. Jr., H.J., E.J.
and F.M.J.—a “difficult” process that has been “physically and mentally draining.”723
426. 	Ms. Sedgwick has “suffered from nightmares and trouble sleeping and trouble
regulating emotion and anger” since her daughter’s murder.724 Dr. Schuurman testified that
she could not imagine “anything worse for a mother … than having their child die in such
a horrific way.”725 As a result, it is Dr. Schuurman’s expert opinion that Ms. Sedgwick is
at risk for “more depressive symptoms, poorer wellbeing, more health problems” and
“enduring distress” which may manifest in heightened “anxiety” and “fear.”726
427. 	Based upon Ms. Sedgwick’s gripping testimony and declaration, declarations from
her children and Dr. Schuurman’s expert report and testimony, Plainitffs submit that Ms.
Sedgwick was close with and misses her daughter immensely. Ms. Sedgwick endured the
agonizing pain of receiving her daughter’s body, cleaning her, preparing her, packing her
with ice and sleeping next to her on November 4, 2019.
428. 	As such, and having examined closely the facts of this particular case, Ms.
Sedgwick should be awarded solatium damages in line with those issued in Warmbier v.
Democratic People’s Rep. of Korea, 356 F. Supp. 3d 20, 59 (D.D.C. 2018), adjusted for
inflation.727 The values in Warmbier for parent solatium claims was $15,000,000.00, and
721 Id. at Tr. 254:11-16.
722 Declaration of Amelia Sedgwick, Ex. 32, ¶¶ 30, 31.
723 Testimony of Amelia Sedgwick, Tr. 256:12-15; see also Tr. 258:11 – 262:7 (testimony of how the children are
doing and their relationship with Ms. Sedgwick); Declaration of Amelia Sedgwick, Ex. 32 ¶¶ 33-40 (same).
724 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 482:10-11.
725 Id. at Tr. 482:7-9.
726 Id. at Tr. 483:23-484:16.
727 Inflation has risen approximately 12% since Warmbier was decided in December 2018 to January 2022.
https://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 108 of 165

109
adjusted for the 12% inflation since the Warmbier case was decided, the Court awards
solatium damages in the amount of $16,800,000.00 to Plaintiff Amelia Sedgwick for the
tragic loss of her daughter Christina Langford on November 4, 2019. Plaintiffs do not seek
a request for an upward departure for Ms. Sedgwick’s judgment.
(d) Christina’s Siblings—Elizabeth Langford, Serina Langford, Isaac
Langford, and E.L.
429. 	As stated supra, four of Christina’s younger siblings—Elizabeth Langford, Serina
Langford, Isaac Langford and E.L.—are Plaintiffs in this case. This section addresses their
claims for solatium damages arising from the murder of their sister.
430. 	E.L., a minor under the guardianship of Amelia, Elizabeth Langford, and Serina
Langford are Christina’s sisters728 and Isaac Langford is Christina’s brother.729
431. 	Christina, Isaac, Elizabeth, Serina and E.L., on paper were separated; but in reality,
they were “very close,” “best friends,” each other’s confidants, connected and always
interested in what each other were doing.730 This included among other things, Christina’s
participation in Elizabeth’s wedding, daily check-ins on the “sisters chat” or getting
together and spending time together over the holidays. 731
432. 	Serina and Christina’s “thing” together was writing music and playing the piano
together while Christina’s children danced in the living room.732 Because of this, Serina
began to teach approximately “thirty (30) kids, ages three to fifteen, to dance” “three times
a week” at the local dance studio.733 “Now, instead of preparing lesson plans” for her
728 Declaration of Amelia Sedgwick, Ex. 32, ¶¶ 3-4; Declaration of Elizabeth Langford, Ex. 33, ¶1; Declaration of
Serina Langford, Ex. 34, ¶ 1.
729 Declaration of Isaac Langford, Ex. 35, ¶ 3.
730 Id. at ¶ 3; Declaration of Serina Langford, Ex. 34, ¶ 7; Declaration of Elizabeth Langford, Ex. 33, ¶¶ 3,7.
731 Declaration of Isaac Langford, Ex. 35, ¶ 3; Declaration of Serina Langford, Ex. 34, ¶ 7; Declaration of Elizabeth
Langford, Ex. 33, ¶7.
732 Declaration of Serina Langford, Ex. 34, ¶¶ 4, 5.
733 Id. at ¶ 6.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 109 of 165

110
students, Serina spends her time helping her mom and her family with raising Christina’s
children and “trying to restore some balance” to their lives.734
433. 	Elizabeth and Christina bonded, and had “a running joke,” over the birth of F.M.J.
Elizabeth was present for the birth of F.M.J., the first person F.M.J. saw when she came
into this world, and as a result, Elizabeth came to be known as F.M.J.’s “pseudo-mom.” 735
As a result of the Defendant’s brutal murder of Christina, the “joke” has become a reality
as Elizabeth has been forced to “assum[e] the daunting task of trying to fill [Christina’s]
shoes” and try and be F.M.J.’s mother.736
434. 	Isaac and Christina spoke weekly about their lives and what was going on.737 While
E.L.’s relationship with Christina was different. Because of their age difference, E.L. was
“raised pretty much as an only child” that didn’t like it when Christina’s kids came over
and got “into her bedroom and into her things.”738 But Christina “was always such a
sweetheart and a gem”, and E.L. and Isaac miss her terribly.739
435. 	E.L. was in class in La Mora with her mother, Serina was in La Mora, Elizabeth
was in Wisconsin, and Isaac was in North Dakota, when the earth-shattering news first
came in that “Nita’s truck had been blown up.”740 This caused Serina to become “violently
ill and spike[] a fever,” and the rest of the day became a blur for Elizabeth.741
734 Id.
735 Declaration of Elizabeth Langford, Ex. 33, ¶ 8.
736 Id. at ¶ 14.
737 Declaration of Isaac Langford, Ex. 35, ¶ 3; Testimony of Amelia Sedgwick, Tr. 239:14-16.
738 Testimony of Amelia Sedgwick, Tr. 257:4-10.
739 Declaration of Isaac Langford, Ex. 35, ¶ 3.
740 Testimony of Amelia Sedgwick, Tr. 249:9-10; Declaration of Serina Langford, Ex. 34, ¶ 12; Declaration of
Elizabeth Langford, Ex. 33, ¶ 9; Declaration of Isaac Langford, Ex. 35, ¶ 5.
741 Declaration of Serina Langford, Ex. 34, ¶ 14; Declaration of Elizabeth Langford, Ex. 33, ¶ 10.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 110 of 165

111
436. 	Several hours later, their fears, anxieties, and “now illness,” were “all magnified
upon learning of Christina’s death.”742 Ms. Sedgwick, E.L,. and Serina “almost all three
collapsed” upon hearing the news, and Serina’s illness, grief, and sadness, had grown so
significant that she was “bed-ridden” for the rest of the evening.743 Their family will forever
have “this ‘black cloud’ surrounding” them.744
437. 	The loss has impacted the siblings in additional ways: E.L. sold her horse (which
she had saved up for),745 moved from La Mora, and went from being the equivalent of an
only child to having Christina’s six children in the home with her.746 But E.L. has said to
Ms. Sedgwick, “those are Christina’s kids, and they need us, Mom.”747 Isaac purchased
Christina and Tyler’s home in La Mora, and he refuses to part with Christina’s piano.748
Elizabeth struggles with trying to figure out how to care for all the children, her mom, and
Tyler without it feeling like she is trying to replace Christina.749 	Serina feels like her
“home is forever shattered” by the attack and Christina’s death.750
438. 	It is Dr. Schuurman’s expert opinion that “the death of a sibling can have profound
implications for surviving brothers and sisters” because “[l]osing a sibling means the loss
of a companion, confidante, role model, and friend. Siblings’ identities are intricately
connected because they share similar stores, histories so that when one of them dies, the
survivors essentially lose a part of themselves.”751 As a result, it is Dr. Schuurman’s expert
742 Declaration of Serina Langford, Ex. 34, ¶ 16.
743 Testimony of Amelia Sedgwick, Tr. 243:22; Declaration of Serina Langford, Ex. 34, ¶ 16.
744 Declaration of Serina Langford, Ex. 34, ¶ 20.
745 Testimony of Amelia Sedgwick, Tr. 257:14-15.
746 Declaration of Amelia Sedgwick, Ex. 32, ¶¶ 33, 43.
747 Id. at ¶ 43.
748 Declaration of Isaac Langford, Ex. 35, ¶ 8.
749 Declaration of Elizabeth Langford, Ex. 33, ¶ 21.
750 Declaration of Serina Langford. Ex. 34, ¶ 20.
751 Expert Report of Dr. Schuurman, Ex. 26_000018.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 111 of 165

112
opinion that Elizabeth Langford, Serina Langford, Isaac Langford and E.L. are at risk for
“serious physical and mental health problems” including “somatic symptoms, depression,”
“sense of isolation and alienation from others,” and “elevated mortality risk.”752
439. 	Dr. Schuurman’s expert opinion that—as result of the Defendant’s violent murder
of their sister Christina—Elizabeth Langford, Serina Langford, Isaac Langford and E.L.
are at “high risk” of “hav[ing] psychological, emotional, and relational challenges
throughout their lifetimes” which may include, but is not limited to, “the development of
traumatic memories, images, and post-traumatic stress symptoms.”753
440. 	The Havlish value for solatium damages for a sibling is $4,250,000.00, and adjusted
for inflation,754 this amount rises to $5,200,000.00.
441. 	The Court addresses, infra., Plaintiffs’ request for an upward departure from these
figures for Plaintiffs Elizabeth Langford, Serina Langford, Isaac Langford, and E.L. for the
loss of their sister Christina Langford on November 4, 2019.
(3) Family of Dawna Ray
442. 	Solatium damages, like damages for pain and suffering, are “by their very nature
unquantifiable.”755 As outlined above, courts have developed a commonly accepted
standardized framework for awarding solatium damages to family members of deceased
victims. Courts award half these amounts to family members of persons who are injured
rather than killed.756 Accordingly, “where the victim does not die, but instead suffers only
injury, spouses receive $6.25 million, parents and children receive $4.25 million, and
752 Id. at 26_000018-19.
753 Id. at 26_000014.
754 Inflation has risen approximately 23% since Havlish was decided in July 2012 to February 2022.
https://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm.
755 Moradi v. Islamic Rep. of Iran, 77 F. Supp. 3d 57, 72 (D.D.C. 2015).
756 Moradi, 77 F. Supp. 3d at 72.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 112 of 165

113
siblings receive $2.125 million.”757 These amounts are merely the baseline and may be
subject to upward or downward adjustments as appropriate under the circumstances.758
443. 	The Langford family members claiming solatium damages arising from the murder
of Dawna Ray are David Langford, Crystal Langford, Brandy Spenst, Joseph Cole
Langford, Bryce Langford, K.L., D.L., M.L., C.L. X.L., J.L., B.L., Karen Woolley, Jaremy
Ray, James Ray, Justin Ray, Jonathan Ray, Kerah Ray, and Amber Ray.
444. 	The Langford family members claiming solatium damages arising from the murder
of T.L. and R.L. are David Langford, Crystal Langford, Brandy Spenst, Joseph Cole
Langford, Bryce Langford, K.L., D.L., M.L., C.L. X.L., J.L., and B.L.
445. 	The Langford family members claiming solatium damages arising from injuries of
the children present at the massacre are David Langford, Crystal Langford, Brandy Spenst,
Joseph Cole Langford, Bryce Langford, K.L., D.L., M.L., C.L., X.L., J.L., and B.L.
(a) David Langford
446. 	On the day of the attack, David Langford was in Phoenix assisting a family
member.759 While running errands, David received a Whatsapp message of a burning
vehicle, but without any context, the burning vehicle alone did not concern him.760 Shortly
after, David received a message from Kenny Miller that Rhonita’s vehicle had been
intentionally set ablaze.761 David immediately jumped into his vehicle and began the eight-
hour drive to La Mora, Mexico.762
757 Id.
758 Id.
759 Testimony of David Langford, Tr. 328:16-18.
760 Id. at Tr. 328:20-24.
761 Id. at Tr. 328:24-329:1.
762 Id. at Tr. 329:1-5
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 113 of 165

114
447. 	During the drive, David prayed that Dawna and his children had somehow avoided
the attack, but Dawna failed to respond to any of David’s messages.763 Assuming the worst,
David feared that he had lost Dawna and his nine children to an attack.764 Even after David
arrived in Mexico, he “was preparing [himself] mentally for most likely what happened to
[his] family.”765 As David traveled with the military to find the location of the attack, he
received a call that the Cartel had murdered Dawna, an older child, and a younger child.766
David had three hours to consider which of his children he would have to live without for
the rest of his life.767
448. 	When David reached the site of the attack three hours later, he opened the front
door of Dawna’s vehicle to find her dead, slumped over the steering wheel.768 Dawna’s
lifeless body had been in that position for hours. 769 David then opened the back door to
find his “precious” T.L. “in a fetal position” and “blown to bits.”770 He also knew that
inside the vehicle lay his baby, R.L., “full of holes and shot up.” 771 But David’s nightmare
did not end here. David next learned that M.L. was missing and his other children had
sustained life-threatening injuries.772
449. 	Entering the hospital in Mexico where his children lay injured and crying was like
walking into a military hospital; “it was horrific.”773 Because the hospital could not provide
the required critical care, David and his injured children traveled by helicopter to the United
763 Id. at Tr. 329:20-330:18.
764 Id. at Tr. 332:7-9.
765 Id. at Tr. 333:19-22.
766 Id. at Tr. 334:23-335-3.
767 Id. at Tr. 335:1-8.
768 Id. at Tr. 336:3-10.
769 Id. at Tr. 336:9.
770 Id. at Tr. 336:10-15.
771 Id. at Tr. 336:12-15.
772 Id. at Tr. 336:16-19; 337:1-4.
773 Id. at Tr. 339:1-12.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 114 of 165

115
States.774 During the 40-minute flight, B.L. laid on David bleeding from his chest wound,
X.L. leaned on David bleeding from his shoulder, while C.L. received urgent medical
attention in effort to keep him alive.775 Even after they arrived at the hospital and his injured
children were stabilized, David endured anguish over his separation from D.L. and J.L.
who remained in Mexico. 776 They had witnessed the murders of their mother and siblings,
yet David could not console them while he attended to his other children’s injuries.777
450. 	Since the attack, David has moved his surviving children from their family home
to the United States.778 C.L. continues to recover from his physical injuries, requiring
ongoing treatment.779 All the surviving children exhibit signs of psychological trauma, such
as refusing to sleep alone in their rooms, experiencing nightmares, and showing a trigger
response to loud noises.780 David focuses on healing his children’s suffering instead of
addressing his own grief and pain.781
451. 	The loss of T.L. and R.L. has caused David immense personal suffering and
stripped his daily life of joy.782 He misses T.L.’s and R.L.’s companionship and mourns
the fact that he never had the opportunity to watch T.L. and R.L. grow into young men.783
452. 	Accordingly, the court awards David Langford for solatium damages for the deaths
of T.L. and R.L. and the injuries to his other children in the values set forth in Havlish and
adjusted for inflation in the total amount of $57,200,000.00.
774 Id. at Tr. 339:12-16.
775 Id. at Tr. 340:7-18.
776 Id. at Tr. 342:24-343:4.
777 Id.
778 Declaration of David Langford, Ex. 66, at 35.
779 Id. at 39.
780 Id. at 41-42.
781 Testimony of David Langford, at Tr. 349-50:17-11.
782 Declaration of David Langford, Ex. 66, at 48.
783 Id. at 47.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 115 of 165

116
David Langford
Solatium Claims
Havlish solatium
values
Present Day solatium values,
accounting for inflation
(rounded to closest $100,000)
T.L (deceased) 	$8,500,000.00 	$10,400,000.00
R.L. (deceased) 	$8,500,000.00 	$10,400,000.00
K.L. (physical and emotional injury) 	$4,250,000.00 	$5,200,000.00
M.L. (physical and emotional injury) 	$4,250,000.00 	$5,200,000.00
C.L. (physical and emotional injury) 	$4,250,000.00 	$5,200,000.00
X.L. (physical and emotional injury) 	$4,250,000.00 	$5,200,000.00
B.L. (physical and emotional injury) 	$4,250,000.00 	$5,200,000.00
D.L. (emotional injury) 	$4,250,000.00 	$5,200,000.00
J.L. (emotional injury) 	$4,250,000.00 	$5,200,000.00
Total 	$46,750,000 	$57,200,000.00
(b) K.L., D.L., M.L., C.L., J.L., X.L., and B.L.
453. 	As described in detail herein, K.L., D.L., M.L., C.L., J.L., X.L., and B.L., witnessed
the murders of their mother, T.L., and R.L. They deeply miss their mother’s comfort and
love, and they miss T.L.’s and R.L.’s companionship.784
454. 	Furthermore, in the immediate aftermath of the attack, the burden fell on them to
find help and tend to each other’s injuries. Even now, they experience nightmares,
flashbacks, sensitivity to loud noises, and physical reactions when discussing the terrorist
attack.785
455. 	Because of the terrorist attack, the children no longer want to live in the family
home in Mexico.786 Although the idea of living in La Mora terrifies them, they miss their
family and friends; they miss the river running beside La Mora; and they miss taking hikes
together.787
784 Declaration of K.L., Ex. 61; Declaration of M.L., Ex. 62; Declaration of D.L., Ex. 63; Declaration of C.L., Ex.
64; Declaration of J.L., Ex. 65; Declaration of David Langford, Ex. 66.
785 Declaration of David Langford, Ex. 66.
786 Id.; Testimony of David Langford, Tr. 349:17-18.
787 Testimony of K.L., Tr. 292:16-21, 293:3-4; Declaration of D.L., Ex. 63, at 3.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 116 of 165

117
456. 	During their transition to a new home in the United States, they missed school and
had difficulty finding new friends.
457. 	Accordingly, the Court awards K.L., D.L., M.L., C.L., J.L., X.L., and B.L. for
solatium damages for the deaths of Dawna Ray, T.L., and R.L., and the injuries to their
siblings in the values set forth in Havlish and adjusted for inflation in the total amount of
$36,400,000.00 each. In lieu of a chart demonstrating solatium claims for each child who
was present for the attack, the below chart serves as an example of the present children’s
claims. Each child receives solatium for Dawna, T.L, R.L., and the other six surviving
children, but does not receive solatium for him or herself.
K.L. Solatium Claims 	Havlish baseline
solatium values
Present day value,
accounting for inflation
Dawna (deceased) 	$8,500,000.00 	$10,400,000.00
T.L (deceased) 	$4,250,000.00 	$5,200,000.00
R.L. (deceased) 	$4,250,000.00 	$5,200,000.00
M.L. (physical and emotional 	$2,125,000.00 	$2,600,000.00
C.L. (physical and emotional injury) 	$2,125,000.00 	$2,600,000.00
X.L. (physical and emotional injury) 	$2,125,000.00 	$2,600,000.00
B.L. (physical and emotional injury) 	$2,125,000.00 	$2,600,000.00
D.L. (emotional injury) 	$2,125,000.00 	$2,600,000.00
J.L. (emotional injury) 	$2,125,000.00 	$2,600,000.00
Total 	$29,750,000.00 	$36,400,000.00
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 117 of 165

118
(c) Joseph Cole Langford, Bryce Langford, Crystal Langford, Brandy
Spenst
458. 	Each of the older children who were not present for the attack have suffered severe
emotional distress since the date of the attack.788 Each member of the Langford family
developed and maintained strong relationships with their mother and siblings. The
evidence presented establishes that the violent circumstances of the attack, the deaths of
the their mother and siblings, and the trauma of their siblings hospitalizations for their
injuries continues to cause Joseph Cole, Bryce, Crystal, and Brandy grief and pain effecting
their daily lives, their health, and their relationships.789 Accordingly, the Court awards
Joseph Cole, Bryce, Crystal, and Brandy solatium damages adjusted for inflation in the
amount of $39,000,000 each.
Solatium Claims 	Havlish baseline
solatium Values
Present day value,
accounting for inflation
Dawna (deceased) 	$8,500,000.00 	$10,400,000.00
T.L (deceased) 	$4,250,000.00 	$5,200,000.00
R.L. (deceased) 	$4,250,000.00 	$5,200,000.00
K.L. (physical and emotional injury) 	$2,125,000.00 	$2,600,000.00
M.L. (physical and emotional injury) 	$2,125,000.00 	$2,600,000.00
C.L. (physical and emotional injury) 	$2,125,000.00 	$2,600,000.00
X.L. (physical and emotional injury) 	$2,125,000.00 	$2,600,000.00
B.L. (physical and emotional injury) 	$2,125,000.00 	$2,600,000.00
D.L. (emotional injury) 	$2,125,000.00 	$2,600,000.00
J.L. (emotional injury) 	$2,125,000.00 	$2,600,000.00
Total 	$31,875,000.00 	$39,000,000.00
788 Declaration of Joseph Cole Langford, Ex. 57; Declaration of Bryce Langford, Ex. 58; Declaration of Crystal
Langford, Ex. 59; Declaration of Brandy Spenst, Ex. 60.
789Id.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 118 of 165

119
(d) Karen Woolley
459. 	Karen Woolley is Dawna Ray’s mother.790 Dawna was the oldest of Ms. Woolley’s
“seven children and she was a constant over-achiever. She learned to talk at ten months old
and was up and walking by the time she was one.” 791
460. 	Ms. Woolley is also the mother to, and legal guardian of, Jonathan Ray, a Plaintiff
in this action. 792 When Jonathan was born, Ms. Woolley deputized Dawna (nine (9) years
old at the time) to be “little mama” of the house because Ms. Wooley would need to travel
far and wide to ensure that Jonathan could (and would) receive the best medical care
possible for his autism.793 Dawna “never hesitated” and “never questioned” Ms. Woolley
about why she was being asked to be “little mama” of the house.794 Rather, Dawna made
sure that she and her brothers and sisters did their “schoolwork, … that they ate, showered,
and brushed their teeth.” 795 “Because of this, Dawna and [Ms. Woolley] had a deep
connection that is difficult to explain. She was more than [Ms. Woolley’s] daughter, she
was also [her] best friend, [her] confidant, and the person whom [Ms. Woolley] trusted the
most.”796
461. 	On November 4, 2019, Ms. Woolley was in Colonia LeBaron, Mexico for her
grandchild’s wedding, and both she and Dawna were excited for the time they would get
to spend together.797
790 Testimony of Karen Woolley, Tr. 263:16.
791 Declaration of Karen Woolley, Ex. 48, ¶ 6; Testimony of Karen Woolley, Tr. 266:15-18.
792 Declaration of Karen Woolley, Ex. 48 ¶ 6, 9; Jonathan Ray Guardianship Documents, Ex. 23.
793 Testimony of Karen Woolley, Tr. 269:19-21; Declaration of Karen Woolley, Ex. 48, ¶ 9.
794 Declaration of Karen Woolley, Ex. 48, ¶ 10.
795 Id.
796 Id. at ¶ 11.
797 Id. at ¶¶ 17-18.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 119 of 165

120
462. 	That morning, however, Ms. Woolley had a mother’s intuition, a sort of feeling that
something was not right.798 	Ms. Woolley’s bad feeling proceeded to get progressively
worse, particularly, when around “noonish,” Dawna should have but did not arrive in
Colonia LeBaron.799
463. 	Soon thereafter, Ms. Woolley’s “daughter Amber, who was white as a sheet, told
[Ms. Woolley] that Dawna, T.L., and R.L. were dead.”800 Ms. Woolley “suffer[s] from high
blood pressure and upon hearing the news, it spiked, [Ms. Woolley] could not breath, and
[she] collapsed. And once [Ms. Woolley] stabilized [her] blood pressure, [she] proceeded
to suffer a debilitating panic attack.”801
464. 	Ms. Woolley has suffered two additional, three total, panic attacks as result of the
November 4, 2019, massacre.802 Ms. Woolley has also experienced night terrors since
November 4, 2019, and “[t]hese night terrors persist to this day.” 803
465. 	And in April of 2021, Ms. Woolley suffered from a stroke that doctors believe was
brought on by, among other things, the stress of her daughter and grandchildren’s
murder.804
466. 	Ms. Woolley has seen a therapist which has helped “[t]o some degree.”805 Ms.
Woolley’s therapist has diagnosed Ms. Woolley with PTSD “as she me[ets] all of the
criteria, including intrusive thought, nightmares, increased arousal, unpleasant reminders,
etc.”806 Dr. Schuurman concurs with this diagnosis, and it is Dr. Schuurman’s expert
798 Testimony of Karen Woolley, Tr. 275:17-276:13.
799 Testimony of Karen Woolley, Tr. 276:2-5.
800 Declaration of Karen Woolley, Ex. 48, ¶ 19.
801 Id. at ¶ 20.
802 Testimony of Karen Woolley, Tr. 282:4-9.
803 Declaration of Karen Woolley, Ex. 48, ¶ 26.
804 Id. at Tr. 282:22-283:6.
805 Id. at Tr. 282:14-17.
806 Expert Report of Dr. Schuurman, Ex. 26_000018.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 120 of 165

121
opinion that Ms. Woolley is a greater risk for long-term “depressive symptoms, poorer
well-being,” “more health problems” and “enduring stress.”807
467. 	Ms. Woolley said her family dynamics have changed since the attack, and that she
and her whole family feel the profound loss of Dawna – “While the miles remain the same,
without Dawna’s constant efforts to keep us together, our geographically dispersed family
feels more apart than ever. We do what we can, but we are all kind of drifting asea. And
knowing that we will never again receive that emoji string from Dawna has only
exacerbated our distance.” 808
468. 	Having examined closely the facts of this particular case, Ms. Woolley should be
awarded solatium damages in line with those issued in Warmbier v. Democratic People’s
Rep. of Korea, 356 F. Supp. 3d 20, 59 (D.D.C. 2018), adjusted for inflation.809 The values
in Warmbier for parent solatium claims was $15,000,000.00, and adjusted for the 12%
inflation since the Warmbier case was decided, the Court awards solatium damages in the
amount of $16,800,000.00.
(e) 	Dawna’s Siblings—Jaremy Ray, Justin Ray, James Ray, Jonathan Ray, Kerah
Ray, and Amber Ray
469. 	As stated supra, Dawna Ray was one of Karen Woolley’s seven children,810
Dawna’s six (6) brothers and sisters—Jaremy Ray, Justin Ray, Jonathan Ray, James Ray,
Kerah Ray, and Amber Ray (collectively, the “Ray’s”)—are Plaintiffs in this case.811
807 Id.
808 Testimony of Karen Woolley, Tr. 283:10-17; Declaration of Karen Woolley, Ex. 48 ¶ 30.
809 Inflation has risen approximately 12% since Warmbier was decided in December 2018 to January 2022.
https://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm
810 Declaration of Karen Woolley, Ex. 48, ¶ 6.
811 Declaration of Jaremy Ray, Ex. 49, ¶ 3; Declaration of Justin Ray, Ex. 51, ¶ 3; Declaration of Jonathan Ray, by
and through, Legal Guardian Karen Woolley, Ex. 53, ¶ 3; Declaration of James Ray, Ex. 52, ¶ 3; Declaration of Kerah
Ray, Ex. 50, ¶ 3; Declaration of Amber Ray, Ex. 54, ¶ 3.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 121 of 165

122
470. 	Jonathan “was born with autism and required [their] mother to focus much of her
attention on his care.”812 So, not only was she Jaremy, Justin, Jonathan, James, Kerah and
Amber’s sister, Dawna was also their pseudo-mother.813 Dawna would also, whenever
called upon, “do whatever was needed to take care” of Jonathan because she was his
“second mother” too.814 Dawna “never did anything but show unconditional love for
Jonathan.”815
471. 	Dawna and Kerah shared another special relationship growing up: they were
roommates.816 Naturally, they fought, “but it was during this time that [Kerah] developed
a special, unique relationship with [her] sister. [Dawna] would tell [Kerah] about her hopes
and dreams of one day meeting a Godly man, starting a family with him and having as
many children as possible because to Dawna, children were life’s blessing. Children were
constant reminders of God’s ever presence and love.”817
472. 	Dawna was the first of the Ray sisters to have a child so, she was able to (and did)
spend hours talking on the phone with Amber and Kerah telling them what to expect, feel,
and do during pregnancy and motherhood. 818
473. 	Ms. Woolley and her children have one new family tradition – on the fourth (4th )
of every month since November 4, 2019, they get together to “reminisce and remember
[Dawna] and [to] honor her.”819
812 Declaration of Amber Ray, Ex. 54, ¶ 4.
813 Declaration of Kerah Ray, Ex. 50, ¶ 4; Declaration of Amber Ray, Ex. 54, ¶ 4; Declaration of Justin Ray, Ex. 51,
¶ 4.
814 Declaration of Karen Woolley, Ex. 48, ¶ 10.
815 Declaration of Jonathan Ray, by and through, Legal Guardian Karen Woolley, Ex. 53, ¶ 8; Declaration of Karen
Woolley, Ex. 48, ¶ 10.
816 Declaration of Kerah Ray, Ex. 50, ¶ 5.
817 Id. at ¶ 6
818 Declaration of Kerah Ray, Ex. 50, ¶¶ 10, 11; Declaration of Amber Ray, Ex. 54, ¶ 17.
819 Declaration of Amber Ray, Ex. 54, ¶ 18.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 122 of 165

123
474. 	Kerah’s son was “getting married in Chihuahua, Mexico on November 8, 2019.”820
So on November 4, 2019, Dawna and her children set out from La Mora for the wedding. 821
475. 	But before she hit the road, Dawna called Kerah and they talked about how it had
been too long and about how excited they were “to see each other, to have the family back
together and to having the long overdue family cook out.”822 Dawna also messaged Amber
and asked if she could make “an appointment for her to have a massage when she
arrived.”823 And she called her brother Justin to discuss her and the kids staying with him
for the week. 824
476. 	“[A]round 11:00 a.m.” when Dawna and the children should have been arriving in
Colonia LeBaron, the Rays learned “that Rhonita LeBaron’s truck was found on fire and
that Dawna and Christina Langford were missing.”825 Amber called Justin “to see if he had
additional information” because, in addition to the shocking news about Rhonita, it was
Amber’s belief “that a cartel had kidnapped Dawna and her children and Christina.”826
477. 	Rather than sit and wait for answers and endure the ensuing chaos and confusion,
Justin left to search for his sister, nieces, and nephews.827 Kerah, Amber and their “family
and friends went to the Church to pray.” 828
478. 	“Things soon took a turn for the worst and began snowballing. [The Rays] learned
that Nita and her children [were] killed and burned. And then, around 5 p.m., [D.L.] (who
was traveling with Dawna) made it back to La Mora and confirmed that Dawna, Christina,
820 Declaration of Kerah Ray, Ex. 50, ¶ 16.
821 Testimony of Kenneth Miller, Tr. 41:24-25.
822 Declaration of Kerah Ray, Ex. 50, ¶ 17.
823 Declaration of Amber Ray, Ex. 54, ¶ 8.
824 Declaration of Justin Ray, Ex. 51, ¶ 5.
825 Id. at ¶ 6; Declaration of Amber Ray, Ex. 54, ¶ 9.
826 Declaration of Amber Ray, Ex. 54, ¶ 10.
827 Declaration of Justin Ray, Ex. 51, ¶ 8.
828 Declaration of Kerah Ray, Ex. 50, ¶ 20.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 123 of 165

124
[T.L.] and [R.L.] were all dead and that his brothers and sisters were still out there-alone,
shot and afraid. Everything, in that moment, forever changed. Everything was turned-
upside-down, wringed-out and hung-out-to-dry.”829
479. 	Justin was informed that his rescue mission had turned into one of recovery. He
was now “going to retrieve [his] sister’s and nephews’ bodies, which was the worst
experience[s]” of his life.830 Justin saw his sister “slouched over her steering wheel” with
“two gunshots in her head and eleven others throughout her body.”831 He saw his nephew
T.L. “dead in the second row with his head blown out.”832 And he saw his nephew R.L.
“on the front floorboard” with “two or three bullets in him.”833
480. 	Justin “loaded up Dawna and her kids into the back of a flatbed truck,” drove to
Dawna’s house in La Mora, “turned the air conditioning in the master bedroom down as
low as it would go, placed the bodies of Dawna, [T.L.] and [R.L.] on the master bed and
packed them with ice.”834
481. 	Back in Colonia LeBaron, Dawna’s sisters were “inconsolable” and trying to help
their mother who was suffering from a panic attack835 while Dawna’s brothers in Utah and
North Dakota 836 rushed as quickly as possible to La Mora.
829 Id. at ¶¶ 21, 22.
830 Declaration of Justin Ray, Ex. 51, ¶ 8; see also Declaration of Adrian LeBaron, Ex. 36_000041-44 (photographs
from Dawna’s vehicle on evening of November 4, 2019).
831 Declaration of Justin Ray, Ex. 51, ¶ 11; see also Declaration of Adrian LeBaron, Ex. 36_000041-44 (photographs
of Dawna Ray).
832 Declaration of Justin Ray, Ex. 51, ¶ 12; see also Declaration of Adrian LeBaron, Ex. 36_000043 (photograph of
T.L.).
833 Declaration of Justin Ray, Ex. 51, ¶ 13; see also Declaration of Adrian LeBaron, Ex. 36_000044 (photograph of
R.L.).
834 Declaration of Justin Ray, Ex. 51, ¶¶ 15-16.
835 Declaration of Kerah Ray, Ex. 50, ¶ 23; Testimony of Karen Woolley, Tr. 280:13-21.
836 Declaration of James Ray, Ex. 52, ¶ 4 (Utah); Declaration of Jaremy Ray, Ex. 49, ¶ 5 (North Dakota).
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 124 of 165

125
482. 	Dawna’s murder has “created a hole” in the Rays’ lives.837 It has caused, among
other things, Kerah to suffer from anxiety so bad that she was hospitalized for six weeks;
Amber to suffer insomnia; and Justin and James to suffer deep depression and loneliness.838
“Dawna was the glue that held all the family” together, and now that she is gone, the “hurt”
and pain can be seen in all the Rays’ “eyes” and it can be felt in their presence.839
483. 	Based upon a thorough review of the record and Dr. Schuurman’s expert opinion,
that Dawna’s death has had, and will continue to have, “profound implications” on the
Rays, 840 including but not limited to, “somatic symptoms, depression, and painful feelings
of grief,” “an elevated mortality risk,” and “sense of isolation and alienation from others.”
484. 	The Havlish value for solatium damages for a sibling is $4,250,000.00, and adjusted
for inflation,841 this amount rises to $5,200,000.00.
485. 	The Court addresses, infra., Plaintiffs’ request for an upward departure from these
figures for Plaintiffs Jaremy Ray, Justin Ray, Jonathan Ray, Kerah Ray, and Amber Ray
for the loss of their sister Dawna Ray.
(4) Requests for Upward Adjustments for Solatium Judgments
486. 	The Havlish numbers are “not set in stone” rather, they “act as a center of gravity
for solatium awards, around which a court may vary the final amount based on the facts
837 Declaration of Amber Ray, Ex. 54, ¶ 13.
838 Declaration of Jaremy Ray, Ex. 49, ¶ 10; Declaration of Justin Ray, Ex. 51, ¶ 18; Declaration of James Ray, Ex.
52, ¶¶ 12, 13; Declaration of Kerah Ray, Ex. 50, ¶ 28; Declaration of Amber Ray, Ex. 54, ¶ 19.
839 Testimony of Douglas Johnson, Tr. 422:2-8.
840 See e.g. Declaration of Amber Ray, Ex. 54, ¶ 7 (Amber lost her role model); Declaration of Kerah Ray, Ex. 50, ¶
28 (Kerah hospitalized for six-weeks).
841 Inflation has risen approximately 23% since Havlish was decided in July 2012 to February 2022.
https://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 125 of 165

126
and circumstances of a particular case.”842 Adjustments upward or downward from the
Havlish baseline are “committed to the discretion of the particular court in each case.”843
487. 	“Factors pertinent to the determination of damage enhancements are largely derived
from common sense” and adjustments “are generally small relative to the award specified
by the developed framework, absent circumstances that appreciably worsen a claimant’s
pain and suffering, such as cases involving torture or kidnapping.”844
488. 	“In such cases, greater awards are justified because the afflicted party not only had
to cope with the grief that follows the loss of a loved one, but—at the time of the event—
was also forced to endure unending anxiety and an extended period of extreme distress
over the health and safety of their captive member.”845
489. 	Furthermore, “[c]ourts have previously recognized that whether the victim’s death
was ‘sudden and unexpected’ is an issue to consider in the calculation of solatium
damages.”846 Because “where the death of a loved one is unforeseen, it can render the shock
and grief suffered by family members all the more intense.”847
490. 	Plaintiffs here were “simply living” their lives when their siblings, children, wives
and/or 	children 	were 	brutally 	murdered 	and 	“[t]hese 	circumstances 	warrant 	an
enhancement” to the standard Havlish numbers.848
491. 	A comparison with other terrorist cases suggests that the Court temper its total
enhancement in this case. In Valore, the court found that the one family member suffered
842 Oveissi, 768 F.Supp.2d at 26; see also Valore, 700 F.Supp.2d at 85-86; Murphy v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 70
F.Supp.2d 51, 79 (D.D.C. 2010).
843 Id.
844 Id. at 26- 27 (internal citation and quotations omitted); see also Greenbaum, 451 F.Supp.2d at 108.
845 Id. at 27.
846 Oveissi, 768 F.Supp.2d at 28 (citing Stethem v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 201 F.Supp.2d 78, 90 (D.D.C. 2002)).
847 Id.
848 Id. at 29.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 126 of 165

127
“several nervous breakdowns”, while another lost both her husband and brother in the
attack yet it found a 25% upward departure to be more reasonable than the plaintiffs’
requested 100% departure.849 Similarly, courts have found “that 40% upward departures
were warranted in (1) a case where one family member testified that her life was
irrevocably changed by the attack, and (2) a cases where the family member was forced to
quit her job and become a full-time caretaker of her now quadriplegic child”; and that
where the decedent’s death was the result of “the heinous murder that defendants planned
and ordered”, a 50% upward adjustment was warranted.850
(a) Miller/LeBaron Family Plaintiffs
492. 	In the case of Rhonita and her children, it was initially believed that the decedents
were kidnapped851 which caused Plaintiffs to worry whether the Defendant Juárez Cartel
was “going to rape Nita and K.B.M.” 852 As stated previously, while no upward adjustment
is being sought for Rhonita’s parents, upward adjustments are being sought for Rhonita’s
husband, her surviving children, and her siblings.
i. 	Howard Miller
493. 	Howard Miller learned that the “unimaginable”853 happened via WhatsApp
message and phone calls from over a thousand miles away from his wife and children in
Mexico. He learned that his wife and four of his children were “burned to death” in what
must have been “the most frightening thing that anyone has ever experienced.”854
849 Valore, 700 F.Supp.2d at 86.
850 Oveissi, 768 F.Supp.2d at 30 (internal citations and quotations omitted).
851 Declaration of Laura Corina LeBaron, Ex. 39, ¶ 11; Declaration of Adriana Jones, Ex. 46, ¶ 17;Testimony of
Adrian LeBaron-Soto, Tr. 202:6-13.
852 Testimony of Adriana Jones, Tr. 507:5-13.
853 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 481:12.
854 Testimony of Dr. Schubl, Tr. 160:21-161:3.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 127 of 165

128
494. 	Even after seeing the videos855 and speaking with family members who confirmed
that Rhonita and the kids were in the vehicle and had died—Mr. Miller held “out hope kind
of in nonbelief … maybe hoping they [his family] could have got out or something.” 856
495. 	His hope was shattered when he saw Rhonita, H.M. Jr., K.B.M., T.A.M. and
T.G.M.’s remains in the vehicle.857 The tragic loss of his wife, first son, eldest daughter
and youngest twins, in such a barbaric and sadistic manner, warrants an enhancement to
the standard Havlish numbers.
496. 	The intensity of this pain, and hurt is ever-present in Mr. Miller’s eyes since the
attacks.858 He is “numb”, “in shock,” and struggling “[b]e strong; be a man; be tough; keep
[his] feelings inside.”859 He is struggling with the fact that the Defendant murdered his soul
mate860 and stole from him the opportunity to teach H.M. Jr. how to golf,861 walk his
daughter (and favorite child) down the aisle at her wedding862 and opportunity to hear
T.A.M. and T.G.M. call him “Daddy.”863
497. 	According to his family, before the attack Howard was “a happy, goofy giant,
always laughing, smiling, just full of life.864 “After the attacks he changed.”865 “He’s closed
up” 866 and “[closed] into himself.”867 According to Dr. Schuurman, this places Mr. Miller
at higher risk of longstanding emotional and physical difficulties.868
855 Video taken by Kenny Miller, “Nita is Shot Up” Ex. 8.
856 Testimony of Howard Miller, Tr. 185:10-13.
857 Id. Tr. 185:14-15; see Family Photos of Miller Attack Scene (Day), Ex. 18.
858 Testimony of Douglas Johnson, Tr. 419:12-13.
859 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 464:20 – 465:5.
860 See Declaration of Howard Miller, Ex. 30 at ¶¶ 7, 53.
861 Declaration of Howard Miller, Ex. 30, ¶ 56.
862 Id.
863 Id.
864 Testimony of Douglas Johnson, Tr. 419:10-12; see also Testimony of Adriana Jones, Tr. 505:18.
865 Testimony of Douglas Johnson, Tr. 419:12.
866 Id. at Tr. 419:13.
867 Testimony of Kenneth Miller, Tr. 68:7.
868 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 465:21-24.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 128 of 165

129
498. 	It is Dr. Schuurman’s expert opinion that Mr. Miller “behaviors and ‘symptoms’
are consistent with trauma reactions and PTSD, including dissociative reactions, and
persistent avoidance of reminders that arouse memories or thoughts associated with the
traumatic events” of November 4, 2019.869
499. 	As detailed above, Mr. Miller’s “lifetime of suffering constitutes the exact sort of
acute feeling of permanent loss or change caused by decedent’s absence that warrants an
upward departure” from the standard Havlish valuation.870
500. 	This is not a situation where the connexity between the murder and the family
member is attenuated. Howard Miller arrived on the scene to see the charred remains of his
wife and four of his children as they had not yet been removed—by other family members
in conjunction with the Mexican authorities—from the scene. 	He slept with his three
surviving children in the room with his murdered family’s remains that night.871
501. 	As set forth, supra., the Havlish numbers—taking into consideration an adjustment
for inflation, places Howard Miller’s pain and suffering for the loss of his wife at
$15,300,000.00 and for the loss of each of his four children at $10,400,000.00 for a total
pain-and-suffering judgment of $56,900,000.00. 	Plaintiffs herein have requested an
upward departure in the range of 10-20% given the egregious circumstances surrounding
this event and Mr. Miller’s suffering. Such an upward departure would render his solatium
damages for the loss of his wife between $16,830,000.00 and $18,360,000.00 and his
solatium 	damages 	for 	the 	loss 	of 	his 	four 	children 	between 	$45,760,000.00 	and
869 Expert Report of Dr. Schuurman, Ex. 26_000011.
870 Oveissi, 768 F.Supp.2d at 29 (citing Valore, 700 F.Supp.2d at 86) (internal quotations omitted).
871 Testimony of Howard Miller, Tr. 186:5-14.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 129 of 165

130
$49,920,000.00 	for 	a 	total 	solatium 	damages 	of 	between 	$62,590,000.00 	and
$68,280,000.00.
502. 	In the exercise of the Court’s discretion, the Court here determines that it will award
an upward adjustment of 20% for the solatium damages judgments for Plaintiff Howard
Miller rendering his total solatium-damages judgment amount $68,280,000.00 for the loss
of his wife, K.B.M., H.M. Jr., T.A.M., and T.G.M..
ii. 	T.M., A.M., and Z.M.
503. 	Rhonita’s surviving children have also significantly suffered followed the death of
their mother and four siblings. 	T.M. “[has] suffered bad.”872 He was initially “crying
himself to sleep for hours. He didn’t want to sleep alone. Even if he fell asleep alone, he
would wake up and go”873 “pounding, … screaming, yelling”874 on the door of an adult’s
bedroom door just to “crawl into the bed”875 next to them. These “nightmares” are in
addition to his being “afraid all the time,” being “scared to death at every noise” and his
difficulty “coping” “when it gets dark.”876 In short, “[h]is sense of security is deep” and it
is Dr. Schuurman’s expert opinion that “ultimately, that type of anxiety is not going to
serve him well.”877
504. 	It is also Dr. Schuurman’s expert opinion that T.M. “is suffering from symptoms
consistent with PTSD … including recurrent distressing dreams related to the traumatic
series of events that killed his mother and siblings, intense and persistent anxiety, and
dissociative reactions. T.M. (like his father) appears to be ‘stuffing’ his feelings, and
872 Testimony of Douglas Johnson, Tr. 420:14, 17.
873 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 468:1-3.
874 Id. Tr. 420:21.
875 Id. Tr. 420:24-25.
876 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 468:4; 468:12-15.
877Id. at Tr. 468:16:17.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 130 of 165

131
displaying anxiety, separation anxiety, and post-traumatic stress symptoms. While these
responses are understandable given what he has experienced, the short-term as well as
long-term impact will take a toll on his physical, emotional, and mental health.” 878
505. 	A.M. has “cerebral palsy”879 which is affecting “the whole left side of her body”880 ,
and on November 4, 2019, A.M. “lost her mother, her caretaker, her protector”,881 her
oldest and youngest brothers and both of her sisters as a result of the depraved acts of the
Defendant. Her mother was supposed to be there for A.M. as she “gr[e]w developmentally,
everything from … all [her] successes, [her] recitals, [her] graduating from high school,
[her] first dates, [her] getting attracted to a boy”; she was supposed to be there at “her
wedding” and be a “grandmother” to A.M.’s children.882 A.M. will feel the pain and sorrow
of her mother’s absence at all these events as she grows up.883
506. 	“A.M. is going to need specialized medical and psychological care as she grows
up. Her mother was the driving force behind getting the physical therapy she needs, and
although other family members have worked to help her, there is no substitute for her
mother and her mother’s love.884 As such, “she will experience, and does already
experience, estrangement and ‘feeling different’ from other girls who have their mothers.
That, combined with her physical challenges, has been extremely difficult and will
continue to be an ongoing challenge as she grows through puberty and into adulthood.”885
878 Expert Report of Dr. Schuurman, Ex. 26_000012.
879 Testimony of Howard Miller, Tr. 174:19.
880 Id. Tr. 174:21.
881 Declaration of Adriana Jones, Ex. 46, ¶ 38.
882 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 469:19-25.
883 Id. Tr. 470:1; see also Howard Miller Declaration, Ex. 30, ¶ 55 (A.M. will miss her mother making “cheesy
potatoes for her birthday”).
884 Expert Report of Dr. Donna Schuurman, Ex. 26_000013.
885 Id.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 131 of 165

132
507. 	While Z.M. was “only” three years old when his mother and siblings were
murdered, Dr. Schuurman testified, “if we as adults learned as many new words a day as
your average three-year-old, we’d all be geniuses. So while [Z.M. couldn’t] verbalize as
well” at three, he was certainty “observing” and “taking in what’s going” on.886 In addition,
irrespective of what Z.M. understood at “three, as he grows older, he will learn more and
more and understand better what happened to his mother and siblings.”887 This will lead,
in Dr. Schuurman’s expert opinion, to a feeling of being “cheated” for Z.M. “as opposed
to [his] older siblings” because he will not “necessarily have memories of” his mother and
siblings.888 “People can show photos and they can talk about [Z.M.’s] mother and siblings,”
but unlike T.M and A.M, Z.M will not “have the same memories.”889
508. 	“Z.M. will need assistance to channel his anger and frustration in positive ways, as
well as getting nurturing that he would have received from his mother. Z.M. appears to
have internalized the ‘be strong’ and ‘keep it inside’ coping of his father and older brother
T.M., and the research suggests that children who do so are at risk for greater adverse
outcomes.”890 Dr. Schuurman further opines that Z.M. is at elevated risk for “development
of 	traumatic 	memories, 	images, 	and 	post-traumatic 	stress 	symptoms” 	as 	well 	as
“psychological, emotional, and relational challenges.”891
509. 	As set forth supra the Havlish numbers—taking into consideration an adjustment
for inflation, places T.M.’s, A.M.’s, and Z.M.’s solatium damages for the loss of their
mother at $10,400,000.00 and for the loss of each of their four siblings at $5,200,000.00
886 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 470:22 – 471:2.
887 Id. at Tr. 471:3-5.
888 Id. at Tr. 471:8-10.
889 Id. at Tr. 471:10-12
890 Expert Report of Dr. Donna Schuurman, Ex. 26_000013.
891 Id. at Ex. 26_000014.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 132 of 165

133
for a total solatium-damages judgment of $31,200,000.00 each. 	Plaintiffs herein have
requested an upward departure in the range of 10-20% given the egregious circumstances
surrounding this event and the suffering of these three minor children. 	Such an upward
departure would render their solatium damages for the loss of their mother between
$11,440,000.00 and $12,480,000.00 and their solatium damages for the loss of their four
siblings between $22,880,000.00 and $24,960,000.00 for a total solatium damages
judgment of between $34,320,000.00 and $37,440,000.00 each.
510. 	In the exercise of the Court’s discretion, the Court here determines that it will apply
a 20% upward adjustment for the solatium-damages judgments for Plaintiffs T.M., A.M.,
and Z.M. rendering their total solatium-damages judgment amounts $37,440,000.00 each
for the loss of their mother and their siblings K.B.M., H.M. Jr., T.A.M., and T.G.M.
iii. Rhonita’s Siblings
511. 	Taken together, the circumstances detailed supra, along with the heinous murder
of Rhonita, H.M. Jr., K.B.M., T.A.M. and T.G.M. has had a profound impact on all of
Rhonita’s siblings.892 It is Dr. Schuurman’s expert opinion, which the Court shares, that
“[l]osing a sibling means the loss of a companion, confidante, role model, and friend.
Siblings’ identities are intricately connected because they share similar histories so that
when of them dies, the survivors essentially lose part of themselves.”893 Rhonita’s death
“also carries high risk factors for … psychological, emotional, and relational challenges”
for Rhonita’s siblings and because of the brutality of her murder, they are also at an
892 See Declaration of Rholena Lian Johnson, Ex. 47, ¶¶ 26 - 28; Declaration of Melissa Conklin, Ex. 45, ¶¶ 15-19;
Testimony of Adriana Jones, Tr. 504: 3-9; Declaration of Laura Corina LeBaron, Ex. 39, ¶¶ 19, 20; Declaration of
William LeBaron, Ex. 41, ¶¶ 18-20; Declaration of Ruthila LeBaron, Ex. 44, ¶¶ 17, 18; Dayer LeBaron Transcript,
Tr. 123:10-12; Miguel LeBaron Declaration, Ex. 40, ¶¶ 24, 25. Declaration of Javier LeBaron, Ex. 42, ¶¶ 16, 17;
Declaration of Matthew LeBaron, Ex. 38, ¶ 19.
893 Expert Report of Dr. Schuurman, Ex. 26_000018 (internal citation and quotations omitted).
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 133 of 165

134
elevated risk for “the development of traumatic memories, images, and post-traumatic
stress symptoms.”894
512. 	The LeBaron siblings were forced as a result of the Defendant’s abhorrent massacre
on November 4, 2019, to literally attempt to piece-by-piece, collect, remove debris from,
clean and prepare for burial, the remains of their sister Rhonita and nieces and nephews
H.M. Jr., K.B.M., T.A.M. and T.G.M. The smells and sights of this cannot and will not
ever be forgotten.895
513. 	A number of these siblings also assisted in the construction of the caskets used to
bury their sister, nieces, and nephews. 896
514. 	The testimony and evidence demonstrates the close nature of the relationship
between Rhonita and her siblings and the continuing impact of her loss to her siblings.
“This lifetime of suffering constitutes the exact sort of acute feeling of permanent loss or
change caused by decedent’s absence that warrants an upward departure” from the standard
Havlish valuation.897
515. 	As set forth, supra., the Havlish numbers—taking into consideration an adjustment
for inflation, places Rhonita’s siblings’ solatium damages for the loss of their sister at
$5,200,000.00. Plaintiffs herein have requested an upward departure in the range of 10-
20% given the egregious circumstances surrounding this event and the suffering endured
by Rhonita’s family including the hands-on nature of helping to prepare her remains for
894 Id. at 000014.
895 See Testimony of Douglas Johnson, Tr. 414:7-8; Declaration of Adrian LeBaron, Ex. 36_000046-63; Photos of
Miller Family Remains Taken by Douglas Johnson, Ex. 73.
896 Declaration of Dayer LeBaron, Ex. 43, ¶ 17; Declaration of Miguel LeBaron, Ex. 40, ¶ 19; Testimony of Dayer
LeBaron, Tr. 118:2-10.
897 Oveissi, 768 F.Supp.2d at 29 (citing Valore, 700 F.Supp.2d at 86) (internal quotations omitted).
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 134 of 165

135
burial. Such an upward departure would render each sibling’s solatium damages for the
loss of their sister between $5,720,000.00 and $6,240,000.00.
516. 	In the exercise of the Court’s discretion, the Court here determines that it will apply
a 20% upward departure for the solatium-damages judgments for each of Rhonita’s siblings
rendering their solatium-damages judgment amount $6,240,000.00 each for the loss of their
sister Maria Rhonita LeBaron.
(b) Johnson/Langford Family Members
517. 	In the case of Christina and her daughter F.M.J., little was known at first because
the only information that anyone was providing was with regard to Rhonita’s family and
what happened to them. 	It was only later that information began to trickle down about
what happened to Christina, but at that time, it was believed that Christina and Tyler’s
baby, F.M.J., had also perished in the attack. While no upward departures are being sought
for Christina’s mother Amelia Sedgwick,Christina’s husband, her surviving children, and
her siblings are seeking such an upward departure.
i. 	Tyler Johnson
518. 	On November 4, 2019, Mr. Johnson was bombarded with questions such as: “have
you heard from your wife?”, “where is Christina?”, “did Christina get there to LeBaron?”
“Where’s Christina, have you texted her, has she called you, it’s been a while.”898 Trying
on the exterior to remain calm, the alarm bells and panic inside Mr. Johnson were going
off as his WhatsApp messages and calls to Christina “weren’t going through.” This terror
would metastasize into a five-alarm fire as minutes felt like hours.899
898 Id. at Tr. 366:3-15; Declaration of Tyler Johnson, Ex. 31, ¶ 25.
899 Declaration of Tyler Johnson, Ex. 31, ¶ 27.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 135 of 165

136
519. 	It would be hours “until that evening before”900 Mr. Johnson would hear “the
message say[ing] that Christina and her baby [were] dead.”901 Mr. Johnson “at the time of
the event” was “forced to endure unending anxiety and an extended period of extreme
distress over the health and safety" of his (presumed) captive wife and daughter.902
520. 	Upon hearing the initial news that his wife and daughter had been murdered, Mr.
Johnson “exited off the balcony,” “went and gathered all [his] children” and “locked
[himself and his children] in the closet in one of the bedrooms and just fell apart.”903 But
his children did not know why their father was deteriorating before their eyes, so he had to
tell them that the unimaginable had occurred and that their mother and sister were dead.904
521. 	Christina and F.M.J.’s (presumed) murder was unequivocally “unforeseen” and as
a result “the shock and grief” Mr. Johnson and his children experienced that evening and
in that closet, and to this day renders Mr. Johnson’s pain and suffering “all the more
intense.”905
522. 	Mr. Johnson’s “pain is palpable.”906 Mr. Johnson battles the “regret and guilt” he
feels about allowing Christina to make the drive by herself.907 And all of Mr. Johnson’s
“dreams are gone; everything [he] valued doesn’t mean anything. [He] feel[s] like [he is]
limbo, just trying to raise [his] kids well. But [he] feels like [he] ha[s] no real purpose on a
personal level.”908
900 Testimony of Amelia Sedgwick, Tr. 250:18.
901 Testimony of Tyler Johnson, Tr. 368:5-6.
902 Oveissi, 768 F.Supp.2d at 27.
903 Testimony of Tyler Johnson, Tr. 368:21-25.
904 Declaration of Tyler Johnson, Ex. 31, ¶ 31.
905 Oveissi, 768 F.Supp.2d at 28.
906 Expert Report of Dr. Schuurman, Ex. 26_000014.
907 Id.; Testimony of Tyler Johnson, Tr. 372:8-12.
908 Expert Report of Dr. Schuurman, Ex. 26_000014.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 136 of 165

137
523. 	It is Dr. Schuurman’s expert opinion that Mr. Johnson “is experiencing symptoms
of PTSD a[s] well as Major Depressive Disorder, including loss of energy, diminished
interests in activities (known as anhedonia), depressed mood, feelings of detachment from
others, persistent inability to experience positive emotions, and self-blame.”909
524. 	As set forth supra the Havlish numbers—taking into consideration an adjustment
for inflation—places Tyler Johnson’s solatium damages for the loss of his wife at
$15,300,000.00. Plaintiffs herein have requested an upward departure in the range of 10-
20% given the egregious circumstances surrounding this event and Mr. Johnson’s belief
on the day of the attack that his baby daughter, F.M.J., had also perished with his wife
Christina. Such an upward departure would render his solatium damages for the loss of his
wife between $16,830,000.00 and $18,360,000.00.
525. 	In the exercise of the Court’s discretion, the Court here determines that it will apply
a 20% upward departure for the solatium-damages judgments for Plaintiff Tyler Johnson
rendering his solatium-damages judgment amount $18,360,000.00 for the loss of his wife
Christina Langford.
ii. 	C.J., J.J., T.J. Jr., H.J., E.J., and F.M.J.
526. 	C.J., J.J., T.J. Jr., H.J., E.J., and F.M.J. were between the ages of twelve and seven
months when their mother was violently taken from them. They no longer will have the
opportunity to build new memories with their mother or have her present at their weddings,
graduations, births of their children, or other key life events. They will also no longer be
able to experience the love, support, and guidance their mother would provide for them.
909 Id. at 000015.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 137 of 165

138
527. 	They will also know that their mother did everything she could to protect one of
her children by emerging from her vehicle during the attack to identify herself as a woman
in hopes of mercy. Her children will know that the Defendant Juárez Cartel disregarded
this fact and murdered their mother after she emerged from the vehicle.
528. 	Taken together, the circumstances detailed supra, along with the heinous murder
of their mother Christina Langford has had a profound impact on all her children.910 It is
Dr. Schuurman’s expert opinion, which this Court shares, that “[t]here is no measure
valid or reliable enough to fully calculate the depth of the loss” these children “have
experienced through the traumatic murder[] of their mother. For the rest of their lives,
they will grieve and miss their mother’s presence and [her] affection, support, protection,
comfort, care, advice, assistance, solace, companionship. No one can fully ‘replace’
[Christina’s] role[] as mother[] and caretaker[] for [her] children, no matter how much
love and support surrounds them. ”911
529. 	As set forth supra the Havlish numbers—taking into consideration an adjustment
for inflation, places C.J.’s, J.J.’s, T.J. Jr.’s, H.J.’s, E.J.’s, and F.M.J.’s solatium damages
for the loss of their mother at $10,400,000.00. Plaintiffs herein have requested an upward
departure in the range of 10-20% given the egregious circumstances surrounding this event
and the suffering of these six minor children. Such an upward departure would render their
910 Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 474:6-9 (C.J. “goes into the closet in her bedroom and cries.”); Testimony of
Amelia Sedgwick, Tr. 258:25 (J.J. “was very angry; very, very angry” following the death of his mother); Expert
Report of Dr. Schuurman, Ex. 26_000015 (T.J. Jr. has been defiant when given instruction, contrary to what his
mother tried to teach him); Declaration of Amelia Sedgwick, Ex. 32, ¶ 38 (H.J. is “very sad, heartbroken” since the
death of his mother); Testimony of Amelia Sedgwick, Tr. 260:18-25 (E.J. has been “traumatized” and “distraught”
since his mother’s murder)
911 Expert Report of Dr. Schuurman, Ex. 26_000017; Testimony of Dr. Schuurman, Tr. 479: 12-14 (F.M.J. will have
no personal memories of her mother to remember, which will affect her throughout her lifetime).
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 138 of 165

139
solatium damages for the loss of their mother between $11,440,000.00 and $12,480,000.00
each.
530. 	In the exercise of the Court’s discretion, the Court here determines that it will
apply a 20% upward departure for the solatium-damages judgments for Plaintiffs C.J.,
J.J., T.J. Jr., H.J., E.J., and F.M.J. rendering their solatium-damages judgment amounts
$12,480,000.00 each for the loss of their mother Christina Langford.
iii. Christina’s Siblings—Elizabeth Langford, Serina Langford,
Isaac Langford, and E.L.
531. 	In this case, it was believed for seven hours, “that Christina had been kidnapped
and was being held for ransom by the cartel.”912
532. 	The circumstances detailed supra, along with the heinous murder of Christina
Langford has had a profound impact on all of Christina’s siblings.913 It is Dr. Schuurman’s
expert opinion, which this Court shares, that ““[l]osing a sibling means the loss of a
companion, 	confidante, 	role 	model, 	and 	friend. 	Siblings’ 	identities 	are 	intricately
connected because they share similar histories so that when of them dies, the survivors
essentially lose part of themselves.”914 As a result, it is Dr. Schuurman’s expert opinion
that Elizabeth Langford, Serina Langford, Isaac Langford and E.L. are at risk for “serious
physical and mental health problems” including “somatic symptoms, depression,” “sense
of isolation and alienation from others,” and “elevated mortality risk.”915
533. 	Christina’s siblings all play a role in assisting Tyler and their mother, Plaintiff
Amelia Sedgwick, with raising Christina and Tyler’s six surviving children.916
912 Declaration of Isaac Langford, Ex. 35, ¶ 6.
913 See Declaration of Isaac Langford, Ex. 35, ¶¶ 8-10; Declaration of Serina Langford, Ex. 34, ¶¶ 20-21;
Declaration of Elizabeth Langford, Ex. 33, ¶¶ 15-22.
914 Expert Report of Dr. Schuurman, Ex. 26_000018 (internal citation and quotations omitted).
915 Id. at 26_000018-19.
916 Testimony of Amelia Sedgwick, Tr. 256:12-23; Declaration of Elizabeth Langford, Ex. 33, ¶¶ 14-19.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 139 of 165

140
534. 	E.L.—who is still a minor herself—has been uprooted from her home to move with
her mother to assist in caring for her nieces and nephews and has been deprived of the
normalcy of a traditional upbringing.917
535. 	Elizabeth Langford, Serina Langford, Isaac Langford and E.L. are at “high risk” of
“hav[ing] psychological, emotional, and relational challenges throughout their lifetimes”
which may include, but is not limited to, “the development of traumatic memories, images,
and post-traumatic stress symptoms.”918
536. 	As set forth supra the Havlish numbers—taking into consideration an adjustment
for inflation, places Christina’s siblings’ solatium damages for the loss of their sister at
$5,200,000.00. Plaintiffs herein have requested an upward departure in the range of 10-
20% given the egregious circumstances surrounding this event and the suffering endured
by Christina’s family. 	Such an upward departure would render each sibling’s solatium
damages for the loss of their sister between $5,720,000.00 and $6,240,000.00.
537. 	In the exercise of the Court’s discretion, the Court here determines that it will apply
a 20% upward departure for the solatium-damages judgments for Elizabeth Langford,
Serina Langford, Isaac Langford, and E.L. rendering their solatium-damages judgment
amount $6,240,000.00 each for the loss of their sister Christina Langford.
(c) Langford/Ray Family Members
i. 	Dawna’s 	Surviving 	Children—Crystal 	Langford, 	Brandy
Spenst, Joseph Cole Langford, Bryce Langford, K.L., D.L.,
M.L., C.L.X.L., J.L., and B.L.
538. 	K.L., D.L., M.L., C.L., X.L., J.L., and B.L. were between the ages of eight months
and 14 years old when the Cartel murdered their mother and their siblings T.L. and R.L. as
917 Testimony of Amelia Sedgwick, Tr. 256:24-25, 257:1-22.
918 Expert Report of Dr. Schuurman, Ex. 26_000014.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 140 of 165

141
they helplessly watched.919 They experienced and continue to experience mental anguish
and grief as result of their own experiences during the massacre and also the heinous
murders of their mother and brothers. 920
539. 	They witnessed their mother riddled with bullets, T.L.’s head blown off, and R.L.
suffer multiple gunshot wounds.921 They then tended each other’s wounds before painfully
trekking their way down the mountain to find help for each other.922
540. 	Crystal, Brandy, Joseph Cole, Bryce, K.L., D.L, M.L., C.L., X.L., J.L., and B.L.
miss the comfort of their mother and the special attention she bestowed upon them.923 They
miss their brothers’ company and the opportunity to watch them grow up. 924 They have
been uprooted from their family home in Mexico, resulting in a physical rift from family
and friends who used to live beside them. 925
541. 	As set forth supra the Havlish numbers—taking into consideration an adjustment
for inflation, places Crystal, Brandy, Joseph Cole, Bryce, K.L., D.L, M.L., C.L., X.L., J.L.,
and B.L.’s solatium damages for the loss of their mother at $10,400,000.00. 	Plaintiffs
herein have requested an upward departure in the range of 10-20% given the egregious
circumstances surrounding this event and the suffering of these children. Such an upward
departure would render their solatium damages for the loss of their mother between
$11,440,000.00 and $12,480,000.00 each. Additionally, the Havlish numbers—taking into
consideration an adjustment for inflation, places Crystal, Brandy, Joseph Cole, Bryce, K.L.,
919 Declaration of K.L., Ex. 61; Declaration of M.L., Ex. 62; Declaration of D.L., Ex. 63; Declaration of C.L., Ex.
64; Declaration of J.L., Ex. 65; Declaration of David Langford, Ex. 66.
920 Id.
921 Testimony of K.L., Tr. 295:21-22, 296:23-25; Declaration of Justin Ray, Ex. 51, ¶¶ 11-13; see also Declaration
of Adrian LeBaron, Ex. 36_000041-44.
922 Testimony of K.L., Tr. 299:10-13, 297-98:25-14.
923 Exs. 57-66.
924 Id.
925 Testimony of K.L, Tr. 292-93:25-7.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 141 of 165

142
D.L, M.L., C.L., X.L., J.L., and B.L.’s solatium damages for the loss of their brothers T.L.
and R.L. at $5,200,000.00 each. Plaintiffs herein have requested an upward departure in
the range of 10-20% given the egregious circumstances surrounding this event and the
suffering of these children. Such an upward departure would render their solatium damages
for the loss of their brothers between $5,720,000.00 and $6,240,000.00 each.
542. 	In the exercise of the Court’s discretion, the Court here determines that it will apply
a 20% upward departure for the solatium-damages judgments for Plaintiffs Crystal,
Brandy, Joseph Cole, Bryce, K.L., D.L, M.L., C.L., X.L., J.L., and B.L. rendering their
solatium-damages judgment amounts $12,480,000.00 each for the loss of their mother
Dawna Langford, $6,240,000.00 each for the loss of their brother T.L., and $6,240,000.00
each for the loss of their brother R.L.
ii. 	David Langford
543. 	Similar to his children, David Langford experienced severe mental anguish and
grief as the result of the murders of his sons and the corresponding loss of society.926 He
must provide guidance and comfort to his children that not only lost their brothers but also
their mother.927
544. 	David also suffered immense mental anguish as he traveled to the scene of the
massacre, knowing that an older child and a younger child had died.928 He had three hours
to think about which children the Cartel had forced him to live without for the remainder
926 Declaration of David Langford, Ex. 66.
927 Testimony of David Langford, Tr. 322:5-19.
928 Id. at Tr. 335:1-8.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 142 of 165

143
of his life. 929 Given that he was a first responder, his last memory of T.L. and R.L. are
them “blown to bits.” 930
545. 	The massacre has uprooted his family.931 David left behind his orchards which he
had considered a family legacy that his children would continue to foster for generations.932
But he cannot live near the area that has devastated their lives.933
546. 	As set forth supra the Havlish numbers—taking into consideration an adjustment
for inflation, places David’s solatium damages for the loss of his children T.L. and R.L. at
$10,400,000.00 each. Plaintiffs herein have requested an upward departure in the range of
10-20% given the egregious circumstances surrounding this event and the suffering of
these children. Such an upward departure would render his solatium damages for the loss
of his children T.L. and R.L. between $11,440,000.00 and $12,480,000.00.
547. 	In the exercise of the Court’s discretion, the Court here determines that it will apply
a 20% upward departure for the solatium-damages judgments for Plaintiff David rendering
his solatium-damages judgment amounts $12,480,000.00 for the loss of his son T.L. and
$12,480,000.00 for the loss of his son R.L.
iii. Dawna’s Siblings—Jaremy Ray, James Ray, Jonathan Ray,
Justin Ray, Kerah Ray, and Amber Ray
548. 	It was initially believed that the Cartel had “kidnapped Dawna and her children.”934
But these reports were wrong as Justin Ray (one of the first on the scene) would, later in
the evening of November 4, 2019, recover his sister “slouched over her steering wheel”
929 Id. at 335:1-8.
930 Id. at 336:10-15.
931 Id. at Tr. 349-50:17-11.
932 Id. at Tr. 321-22:19-3.
933 Id. at Tr. 349:17-20.
934 Declaration of Amber Ray, Ex. 54, ¶ 10; Declaration of Justin Ray, Ex. 51, ¶ 6.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 143 of 165

144
with “two gunshots in her head and eleven others throughout her body.”935 He recovered
his nephew T.L. who was “dead in the second row with his head blown out.”936 And he
recovered his nephew R.L. who was “on the front floorboard” with “two or three bullets in
him.”937
549. 	Justin and his brothers and sisters here were “simply living”938 their lives, excited
to see Dawna at 	the upcoming wedding and excited to be getting together again for a
family cook-out when their sister was brutally murdered.
550. 	As Dr. Schuurman testified, “[t]hese deaths cannot be viewed as anything less than
unjust”939 and the “the lack of trust in ‘justice’ in this case is pervasive.”940
551. 	The closeness of the family and their reliance upon Dawna as a source of wisdom
and guidance has been forever lost and replaced with a new family tradition – on the fourth
(4th ) of every month since November 4, 2019, they get together (using the technology
Dawna taught them) to “reminisce and remember [Dawna] and [to] honor her.”941
552. 	As set forth supra the Havlish numbers—taking into consideration an adjustment
for inflation, places Dawna’s siblings’ solatium damages for the loss of their sister at
$5,200,000.00. Plaintiffs herein have requested an upward departure in the range of 10-
20% given the egregious circumstances surrounding this event and the suffering endured
935 Declaration of Justin Ray, Ex. 51, ¶ 11; see also Declaration of Adrian LeBaron, Ex. 36_000041-44 (photographs
of Dawna Ray).
936 Declaration of Justin Ray, Ex. 51, ¶ 12; see also Declaration of Adrian LeBaron-Soto, Ex. 36_000043
(photograph of T.L.).
937 Declaration of Justin Ray, Ex. 51, ¶ 13; see also Declaration of Adrian LeBaron-Soto, Ex. 36_000044
(photograph of R.L.).
938 Oveissi, 768 F.Supp.2d at 29
939 Expert Report of Dr. Schuurman, Ex. 26_000008.
940 Id.
941 Declaration of Amber Ray, Ex. 54, ¶ 18.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 144 of 165

145
by Dawna’s family. 	Such an upward departure would render each sibling’s solatium
damages for the loss of their sister between $5,720,000.00 and $6,240,000.00.
553. 	In the exercise of the Court’s discretion, the Court here determines that it will apply
a 20% upward departure for the solatium-damages judgments for Jaremy Ray, James Ray,
Jonathan Ray, Justin Ray, Kerah Ray, and Amber Ray rendering their solatium-damages
judgment amount $6,240,000.00 each for the loss of their sister Dawna Ray.
d. 	Pecuniary Loss
554. 	In addition to their emotional suffering, certain Plaintiffs also sustained economic
or pecuniary damages. 	This includes lost wages, funeral expenses, lost benefits, loss of
household services, and loss of enjoyment of life.
(1) Miller Plaintiffs
555. 	The Miller Plaintiffs’ economic expert, Dr. Stan V. Smith, offered evidence by
affidavit that calculated the economic loss for each deceased victim—Maria Rhonita
LeBaron, Christina Langford, H.M., Jr., K.B.M., T.G.M. and T.A.M.942
556. 	In calculating pecuniary damages resulting from the deaths of Rhonita and
Christina, Dr. Smith considered several factors: loss of household/family services; loss of
value of life; and loss of society or relationship. 943 Dr. Smith considered estimated life
expectancy if they had not been killed by the Defendant on November 4, 2019, among
other factors, to calculate the damages that resulted from their murders.944
557. 	For the loss of household/family services, Dr. Smith analyzed contributions to the
household through housekeeping and household management services; advice and
942 Expert Report of Dr. Stan Smith, Ex. 27.
943 See Id. Ex. 27_000009-18 (Christina); 000188-000199 (Rhonita).
944 See Id. Ex. 27_000008 (Christina); 000187 (Rhonita).
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 145 of 165

146
guidance the adult decedents would have given their surviving families; accompaniment
services they would have participated in with their surviving families.945
558. 	For Rhonita, Dr. Smith also analyzed the contribution she made to A.M’s therapy
for cerebral palsy.946
559. 	For H.M. Jr., K.B.M., T.A.M., and T.G.M., the pecuniary damages include loss of
household/family services, loss of value of life, and loss of society or relationship discussed
above.947 In addition, loss of wages and employee benefits are part of the calculation for
the deceased children. 	Dr. Smith’s methodology for calculating each child’s lost wages
and benefits included looking at the parents’ education level and career.948 He set up two
scenarios based on Rhonita’s and Howard Miller’s education levels and estimated the
average earnings based on information from the U.S. Department of Labor.949 Dr. Smith
then accounted for personal consumption to offset the income total.950 	He applied the
personal consumption offset to both wage scenarios and created a chart to reference
depending on the age the child stopped working.951
560. 	Due to the uncertainty of how much schooling the children would have pursued,
Dr. Smith provided two scenarios in his calculations.952
561. 	In the report provided for Rhonita LeBaron, Dr. Smith provides the monetary
damages that would be award to the estates of the deceased victims as well as the damages
for their surviving family members.
945 Id. at Ex. 27_000009-15 (Christina); 000188-000194 (Rhonita).
946 Id. at 000194-195.
947 Id. at 000447-454 (H.M. Jr.); 000555-562 (K.B.M.); 000647-654 (T.A.M.); 000741-74A8 (T.G.M.).
948 Id. at 000445-447 (H.M. Jr.); 000553-555 (K.B.M.); 000645-647 (T.A.M.); 000739-741 (T.G.M.).
949 Id.
950 Id.
951 Id.
952 Id.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 146 of 165

147
562. 	In the analysis of pecuniary damages for each of the Miller Plaintiffs, Dr. Smith
used well-accepted methodologies in economics to calculate the losses using multiple
categories and scenarios to account for differences in age, educations, and lifestyle.
563. 	The analysis conducted by Dr. Smith in this case is similar to that which Dr. Smith
performed in Havlish, and as the court in Havlish found, this Court finds Dr. Smith’s
calculations to be “reasonable, and yield economic damages comparable to those in other
cases.” 953 Dr. Smith calculated the Miller economic damages to the victims as follows.
564. 	The economic damages related to the death of Rhonita LeBaron:
953 Havlish, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 110673, at *98-*99, adopted in its entirety by Havlish v. bin Laden, 2012 U.S.
Dist. LEXIS 143525 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 3, 2012).
954 The value of pecuniary loss attributed to the estate claimants reflects the totals of Loss of Wages & Benefits, Net
of Personal Consumption, Loss of Household/Family Housekeeping and Home Management Services, and Loss of
Value of Life.
955 The value of pecuniary loss attributed to family members of decedents includes Loss of Household/Family
Guidance Services, Loss of Household/Family Accompainment Services, and Loss of Society and Relationship.
Rhonita LeBaron
Plaintiff 	Total 	Economic
Loss to Plaintiff
Citation
Estate 	$7,970,160.00954 	Ex 27_000209-10
Adrian LeBaron-Soto 	$726,149.00955 	Ex 27_000209-10
Bathsheba Tucker 	$950,819.00 	Ex 27_000209-10
Rholena Johnson 	$1,240,675.00 	Ex 27_000209-10
Melissa Conklin 	$1,308,506.00 	Ex 27_000209-10
Adriana Jones 	$1,299,899.00 	Ex 27_000209-10
Laura LeBaron 	$1,330,552.00 	Ex 27_000209-10
William LeBaron 	$1,325,583.00 	Ex 27_000209-10
Ruthila LeBaron 	$1,437,822.00 	Ex 27_000209-10
Dayer LeBaron 	$1,424,945.00 	Ex 27_000209-10
Javier LeBaron 	$1,462,555.00 	Ex 27_000209-10
Miguel LeBaron 	$1,497,138.00 	Ex 27_000209-10
Matthew LeBaron 	$1,545,638.00 	Ex 27_000209-10
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 147 of 165

148
565. 	The economic damages to the Estate related to the death of H.M. Jr.:
H.M. Jr.
Plaintiff 	Total Economic Loss to
Plaintiff
Citation
Estate - Scenario 2956 	$8,153,448.00 	Ex 27_000465
566. 	The economic damages to the Estate related to the death of K.B.M.:
K.B.M.
Plaintiff 	Total Economic Loss to
Plaintiff
Citation
Estate – Scenario 2 	$7,784,430.00 	Ex 27_000573
567. 	The economic damages to the Estate related to the death of T.A.M.:
T.A.M.
Plaintiff 	Total 	Economic 	Loss 	to
Plaintiff
Citation
Estate - Scenario 2 	$8,861,742.00 	Ex 27_000665
568. 	The economic damages to the Estate related to the death of T.G.M.:
T.G.M.
Plaintiff 	Total 	Economic 	Loss 	to
Plaintiff
Citation
Estate - Scenario 2 	$8,337,358.00 	Ex 27_000759
956 The Court hereby endorses “Scenario 2” for each of the children who were killed as it maximizes the damages for
these horrific events and accounts for some level of post-secondary education for each child.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 148 of 165

149
569. 	Plaintiff Howard Miller’s economic damages related to the death of his wife,
Rhonita LeBaron, and his four deceased children—H.M. Jr., K.B.M., T.A.M., and T.G.M.:
Howard Miller 	Total Figure 	Citation
Rhonita 	$2,744,453.00 	Ex 27_000209-10
H.M. Jr. 	$1,352,118.00 	Ex 27_000465
K.B.M. 	$1,325,168.00 	Ex 27_000573
T.A.M. 	$1,194,348.00 	Ex 27_000665
T.G.M. 	$1,194,348.00 	Ex 27_000759
Total Loss to Howard Miller Sr. 	$7,810,435.00
570. 	Plaintiff T.M.’s economic damages related to the death of his mother, Rhonita
LeBaron, and four brothers and sisters—H.M. Jr., K.B.M., T.A.M., and T.G.M.:
T.M. 	Total Figure 	Citation
Rhonita LeBaron 	$3,194,656.00 	Ex 27_000209-10
H.M. Jr. 	$1,783,485.00 	Ex 27_000465
K.B.M. 	$1,798,632.00 	Ex 27_000573
T.A.M. 	$1,626,644.00 	Ex 27_000665
T.G.M. 	$1,626,644.00 	Ex 27_000759
Total Economic Loss to T.M. 	$10,030,061.00
571. 	Plaintiff A.M.’s economic damages related to the death of her mother, Rhonita
LeBaron, and four brothers and sisters—H.M. Jr., K.B.M., T.A.M., and T.G.M.:
A.M. 	Total Figure 	Citation
Rhonita LeBaron 	$3,734,033.00 	Ex 27_000209-10
H.M. Jr. 	$1,858,107.00 	Ex 27_000465
K.B.M. 	$1,909,405.00 	Ex 27_000573
T.A.M. 	$1,794,686.00 	Ex 27_000665
T.G.M. 	$1,794,686.00 	Ex 27_000759
Total Economic Loss to A.M. 	$11,090,917.00
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 149 of 165

150
572. 	Plaintiff Z.M.’s economic damages related to the death of his mother, Rhonita
LeBaron, and four brothers and sisters—H.M. Jr., K.B.M., T.A.M., and T.G.M.:
Z.M. 	Total Figure 	Citation
Rhonita 	$3,538,881.00 	Ex 27_000209-10
H.M. Jr. 	$1,836,347.00 	Ex 27_000465
K.B.M. 	$1,887,645.00 	Ex 27_000573
T.A.M. 	$1,769,450.00 	Ex 27_000665
T.G.M. 	$1,769,450.00 	Ex 27_000759
Total Economic Loss to
Z.M. $10,801,773.00
573. 	The economic damages related to the death of Christina Langford:
Christina Langford
Plaintiff 	Total Economic Loss to
Plaintiff
Citation
Estate 	$7,710,017.00 	Ex 27_000028
Tyler Johnson Sr. 	$4,132,610.00 	Ex 27_000028-29
C.J. 	$3,020,645.00 	Ex 27_000028-29
J.J. 	$3,081,303.00 	Ex 27_000028-29
T.J. Jr. 	$3,229,694.00 	Ex 27_000028-29
H.J. 	$3,423,974.00 	Ex 27_000028-29
E.J. 	$3,551,362.00 	Ex 27_000028-29
F.M.J. 	$3,747,500.00 	Ex 27_000028-29
Amelia Sedgwick 	$914,662.00 	Ex 27_000028-29
E.L. 	$1,630,834.00 	Ex 27_000028-29
Elizabeth Langford 	$1,524,309.00 	Ex 27_000028-29
Serina Langford 	$1,544,444.00 	Ex 27_000028-29
Isaac Langford 	$1,432,556.00 	Ex 27_000028-29
574. 	While Dr. Smith was not asked to opine on the economic impact of Dawna’s death
on her surviving family members, it is possible to use the numbers established with
Rhonita, K.B.M., H.M. Jr., T.A.M., T.G.M., and Christina’s estates to extrapolate the
following general guidelines for the Ray family members who are Plaintiffs in the Miller
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 150 of 165

151
case (Karen Woolley, Jaremy Ray, James Ray, Justin Ray, Jonathan Ray, Kerah Ray, and
Amber Ray) and the economic awards to the various members of the family:
Dawna Ray
Plaintiff 	Total Economic Loss to
Plaintiff
Karen Woolley 	$517,644.00957
Jaremy Ray 	$982,722.00958
Justin Ray 	$1,079,486.00959
James Ray 	$1,126,347.00960
Jonathan Ray 	$1,172,228.00961
Kerah Ray 	$1,172,228.00962
Amber Ray 	$1,304,210.00963
575. 	In addition to Dr. Smith’s evaluation of the losses to Plaintiffs, Plaintiff Dayer
LeBaron also submitted evidence by affidavit and live testimony to the lost wages—
totaling $308,648.00—he experienced after the November 4, 2019 attack.964 Based on the
evidence submitted, the Court shall award economic-loss damages to Plaintiff Dayer
LeBaron in the amount of $150,000.
957 Loss of Household/Family Guidance Services: $43,014.00; Loss of Household/Family Accompaniment Service:
$40,494.00; Loss of Relationship: $434,136.00.
958 Loss of Household/Family Guidance Services: $77,282.00; Loss of Household/Family Accompaniment Service:
$72,739.00; Loss of Relationship: $832,701.00.
959 Loss of Household/Family Guidance Services: $86,208.00; Loss of Household/Family Accompaniment Service:
$81,140.00; Loss of Relationship: $912,138.00.
960 Loss of Household/Family Guidance Services: $90,637.00; Loss of Household/Family Accompaniment Service:
$85,309.00; Loss of Relationship: $950,401.00.
961 Loss of Household/Family Guidance Services: $95,045.00; Loss of Household/Family Accompaniment Service:
$89,458.00; Loss of Relationship: $987,725.00.
962 Loss of Household/Family Guidance Services: $95,045.00; Loss of Household/Family Accompaniment Service:
$89,458.00; Loss of Relationship: $987,725.00.
963 Loss of Household/Family Guidance Services: $108,138.00; Loss of Household/Family Accompaniment Service:
$101,782.00; Loss of Relationship: $1,094,290.00.
964 Declaration of Dayer LeBaron, Ex. 43_000003, ¶ 18.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 151 of 165

152
(2) 	Langford Plaintiffs
576. 	Langford Plaintiffs’ economic expert, J. Matthew Sims, offered evidence by
affidavit that calculated the economic loss for each deceased victim—Dawna Langford,
T.L., and R.L.965 Mr. Sims also evaluated the vocational and rehabilitation losses for K.L.,
D.L., M.L., C.L., J.L., X.L., and B.L. who witnessed the traumatic murders of Dawna, T.L.,
and R.L.
577. 	For the loss of Dawna Langford’s household services, Mr. Sims considered the time
Dawna Langford devoted to her family and her contributions to caring for the household,
such as cooking, cleaning, gardening, making household purchases, and caring for other
household members.966 Mr. Sims used Dawna Langford’s life expectancy if she had not
been murdered on November 4, 2019, to reach a final value for those contributions.967 For
the minor surviving plaintiffs, Mr. Sims calculated the cost of vocational rehabilitation to
compensate for the lingering psychological symptoms that effect schooling and lifelong
earning capacity.968 For the deceased minor plaintiffs, T.L. and R.L., Mr. Sims calculated
the loss of earning capacity minus personal consumption.969
578. 	The tables below capture the vocational economic damages calculated by Mr. Sims
for the Langford Plaintiffs.
579. 	As with Dawna’s mother and adult siblings supra, the expert did not opine on (1)
loss of family guidance services, (2) loss of accompaniment, or (3) loss of family society
and relationship as economic damages for the deaths of Dawna, T.L., and R.L. However,
965 Expert Report of J. Matthew Sims, Ex. 28.
966 Id. at 14.
967 Id.
968 Id. at 28-29.
969 Id. at 125-26.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 152 of 165

153
case law recognizes that the court should “strive to maintain consistency of awards among
plaintiffs in comparable situations.” Goldstein v. Islamic Rep. of Iran, 383 F. Supp. 3d 15,
19 (D.D.C. 2019). Equity compels that the Langford Plaintiffs receive economic damages
for loss of guidance, accompaniment, and society for the deaths of Dawna, T.L., and R.L.
as established by Dr. Smith. 	Id. Accordingly, the below tables demonstrate the loss of
guidance, accompaniment, and relationship as extrapolated from Dr. Smith’s calculations
and rounded down.
David 	Guidance, Accompaniment,
and Relationship
T.L. 	$1,110,000.00
R.L. 	$750,150.00
Total
Economic
Loss
$1,860,150.00
Crystal,
Brandy,
Joseph Cole,
and Bryce
Guidance, Accompaniment,
and Relationship
Dawna 	$1,200,000.00
T.L. 	$1,320,000.00
R.L. 	$1,180,000.00
Total
Economic
Loss
$3,700,000.00
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 153 of 165

154
K.L. 	Guidance,
Accompaniment, and
Relationship
Vocational 	Combined
Total
Dawna 	$2,248,000.00 	$32,354.00970
T.L. 	$1,680,000.00
R.L. 	$1,520,000.00
Totals 	$5,448,000.00 	$32,354.00 	$5,480,354.00
D.L. 	Guidance,
Accompaniment, and
Relationship
Vocational 	Combined
Total
Dawna 	$2,990,00.00 	$33,562.00971
T.L. 	$1,680,000.00
R.L. 	$1,520,000.00
Totals 	$6,190,000.00 	$32,562.00 	$6,222,562.00
M.L. 	Guidance,
Accompaniment, and
Relationship
Vocational 	Combined
Total
Dawna 	$3,046,000.00 	$35,667.00972
T.L. 	$1,680,000.00
R.L. 	$1,520,000.00
Totals 	$6,246,000.00 	$35,667.00 	$6,281,667.00
C.L. 	Guidance,
Accompaniment, and
Relationship
Vocational 	Combined
Total
Dawna 	$3,170,611.00 	$37,220.00973
T.L. 	$1,680,000.00
R.L. 	$1,520,000.00
Totals 	$6,370,611.00 	$37,220.00 	$6,407,831.00
970 Expert Report of J. Matthew Sims, Ex. 28, at 29-33.
971 Id. at 43-48.
972 Id. at 58-63.
973 Id. at 73-78.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 154 of 165

155
J.L. 	Guidance,
Accompaniment, and
Relationship
Vocational 	Combined
Total
Dawna 	$3,377,000.00 	$38,026.00974
T.L. 	$1,781,000.00
R.L. 	$1,600,000.00
Totals 	$6,577,000.00 	$38,026.00 	$6,796,026.00
X.L. 	Guidance,
Accompaniment, and
Relationship
Vocational 	Combined
Total
Dawna 	$3,468,000.00 	$35,685.00975
T.L. 	$1,781,000.00
R.L. 	$1,600,000.00
Totals 	$6,849,000.00 	$35,685.00 	$6,884,685.00
B.L. 	Guidance,
Accompaniment, and
Relationship
Vocational 	Combined
Total
Dawna 	$3,746,500.00 	$37,752.00976
T.L. 	$1,781,000.00
R.L. 	$1,600,000.00
Totals 	$7,127,500.00 	$37,752.00 	$7,165,252.00
Estates 	Household Services
and Vocational
Total
Dawna 	$740,030.00977 	$740,030.00
T.L. 	$497,188.00978 	$497,188.00
R.L. 	$485,712.00979 	$485,712.00
974 Id. at 118-23.
975 Id. at 88-93.
976 Id. at 103-08.
977 Id. at 14-16.
978 Id. at 125-32.
979 Id. at 141-48.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 155 of 165

156
e. 	Treble Damages
580. 	Finally, 18 U.S.C. § 2333(a) specifically provides that Plaintiffs “shall recover
threefold the damages he or she sustains and the cost of the suit, including attorney’s fees.”
The 	trebling 	applies 	not 	only 	to 	economic, 	but 	also 	to 	non-economic 	damages
(solatium/pain and suffering). 980
f. 	Pre-Judgment Interest
581. 	This Court has discretion to award Plaintiffs’ pre-judgment interest from November
4, 2019, until the date of final judgment, “and how to compute—prejudgment interest rests
within the sound ‘discretion of the court subject to equitable considerations.’”981
582. 	Courts dealing with other terrorism-related claims arising from the terrorist attacks
on September 11, 2001 and the bombings of EgyptAir Flight 648 and UTA Flight 772 have
awarded prejudgment interest to “compensate the victims for any delay due to litigation”
and to prevent terrorists “from profiting from [their] terrorist attacks.”982 “[E]ven where
statutory treble damages are available, any erosion of the trebling on account of a denial
of interest undermines the deterrent force of the [ATA]…. The denial of prejudgment
interest systematically undercompensates victims and undeters putative offenders. We
should allow, indeed require, such awards.”983
980 See, e.g., Caballero v. FARC, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89839, at *14 (S.D. Fla. May 20, 2020).
981 Pugh, 530 F.Supp.2d at 263 (D.D.C. 2008) (internal citation omitted); see also Turn Key Gaming v. Oglala Sioux
Tribe, 313 F.3d 1087, 1093 (8th Cir. 2002), quoting Cargill, Inc. v. Taylor Towing Serv., Inc., 642 F.2d 239, 241-43
(8th Cir. 1981) (holding “the award of prejudgment interest, in the absence of statutory directives, rests in the
discretion of the district court…. Prejudgment interest is to be awarded whenever damages lawfully due are
withheld, unless there are exceptional circumstances to justify the refusal”).
982 Baker v. Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, 775 F.Supp.2d 48, 86 (D.D.C. 2011) (emphasis added); see
also Pugh, 530 F.Supp.2d at 264; Havlish v. bin Laden, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143525, at *82-*83 (S.D.N.Y. Oct.
3, 2012).
983 Pugh, 530 F.Supp.2d at 264 (internal citation and quotations omitted) (emphasis added).
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 156 of 165

157
583. 	Prejudgment interest is one of the general principals against which Congress
created the ATA; as such, this Court chooses to follow its fellow North Dakota district
court in LexMac Energy, L.P.,984 and looks to North Dakota law which allows for the
recovery of pre-judgment interest, in the discretion of the Court, “in every case of
oppression, fraud, or malice.”985
584. 	The facts as stated supra will not be restated; however, the outrageous conduct of
Defendant here exceeds the standard for awarding prejudgment interest.
585. 	Therefore, 	the 	Court 	awards 	Plaintiffs’ 	prejudgment 	interest, 	on 	Plaintiffs
“economic and non-economic damages,”986 at a rate of 6.5 percent987 from November 4,
2019, until the date of this judgment. Under North Dakota law, such prejudgment interest
amounts are subject to simple, and not compound, interest.988
g. 	Post-Judgment Interest
586. 	Section 1961(a) of Title 28 of the United States Code provides that post-judgment
“[i]nterest shall be allowed on any money judgment in a civil case recovered in a district
court.”989 “Such interest shall be calculated from the date of the entry of the judgment, at a
rate equal to the weekly average 1-year constant maturity Treasury yield, as published by
the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, for the calendar week preceding
the date of the judgement.”990
984 LexMac Energy, L.P. v. Macquarie Bank Ltd., Case No. 4:08-cv-048 (D.N.D.), 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 188438,
at *127 (D.N.D. Feb. 19, 2014).
985 N.D.C.C. § 32-03-05 (emphasis added).
986 Gonzalez v. Tounjian, 665 N.W.2d 705, 717 (N.D. 2003) (internal citation omitted).
987 N.D.C.C. § 28-20-34; “Interest Rate on Judgments,” State of North Dakota Courts, located at
https://www.ndcourts.gov/state-court-administration/interest-rate-on-judgments (last visited Mar. 17, 2022).
988 N.D.C.C. § 28-20-34.
989 28 U.S.C. § 1961(a) (emphasis added).
990 Id.
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 157 of 165

158
587. 	Post-judgment interest “shall be compounded annually.”991
588. 	Accordingly, and as the court in Caballero v. Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de
Colombia, 992 this Court finds that Plaintiffs are entitled to post-judgment interest,
compounded annually, at a rate equal to the weekly average 1-year constant maturity
Treasury yield for the calendar week preceding the date of this final judgment.993
h. 	Attorney’s Fees and Costs
589. 	Under 18 U.S.C. § 2333(a), prevailing plaintiffs “shall recover threefold the
damages he or she sustains and the cost of the suit, including attorney’s fees.”
590. 	Under a similar statutory scheme utilizing this same language for recovery of
“threefold the damages … and the cost of the suit, including attorney’s fees”, the Eighth
Circuit has stated that “an award of reasonable attorney’s fees and costs under [this
verbiage] is mandatory….” 994
591. 	The Miller and Langford Plaintiffs have stated their intention to move this Court
for an award of attorney’s fees and costs and shall submit such motion along with an
Affidavit of Attorney’s Fees and Costs pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2333(a) within twenty (20)
days of the Court entering this Order unless such motion and affidavit has already been
filed in advance of the entry of this judgment.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, this Court enters these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
and awards damages in the following amounts to each Plaintiff in the Miller action.
991 28 U.S.C. § 1961(b) (emphasis added).
992 Caballero, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89839, at *7.
993 Market Yield on U.S. Treasury Securities at 1-year Constant Maturity may be found on the Board of Governors
of the Federal Reserve System’s website: https://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/h15/default.htm.
994 United HealthCare Corp. v. American Trade Ins. Co., 88 F.3d 563, 575 (8th Cir. 1996) (interpreting identical
language contained in 18 U.S.C. § 1964(c) relating to claims under RICO).
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 158 of 165

159
Plaintiff 	Economic
Damages
Non-
Economic
Damages
Value
(Decedent/
Survivor)
Solatium
Damages
(Relatives Only)
20%
Departure
Value(s)
Solatium
Award
(Relatives Only)
Total Damages
Prior to
Trebling Under
18 U.S.C.
2333(a)
Miller Family
Estate of
Maria
Rhonita
LeBaron
$7,970,160.00 	$45,390,000.00 	$53,360,160.00
Estate of
H.M. Jr.
$8,153,448.00 	$45,390,000.00 	$53,543,448.00
Estate of
K.B.M.
$7,784,430.00 	$45,390,000.00 	$53,174,430.00
Estate of
T.A.M.
$8,861,742.00 	$45,390,000.00 	$54,251,742.00
Estate of
T.G.M.
$8,337,358.00 	$45,390,000.00 	$53,727,358.00
Howard
Miller
$7,810,435.00 	$56,900,000.00 	$68,280,000.00 	$76,090,435.00
T.M. 	$10,030,061.00 	$31,200,000.00 	$37,440,000.00 	$47,470,061.00
A.M. 	$11,090,917.00 	$31,200,000.00 	$37,440,000.00 	$48,530,917.00
Z.M. 	$10,801,773.00 	$31,200,000.00 	$37,440,000.00 	$48,241,773.00
Adrian
LeBaron-
Soto
$726,149.00 	$16,800,000.00 	$16,800,000.00 	$17,526,149.00
Bathsheba
Shalom
Tucker
$950,819.00 	$16,800,000.00 	$16,800,000.00 	$17,750,819.00
Rholena
Lian
Johnson
$1,240,675.00 	$5,200,000.00 	$6,240,000.00 	$7,480,675.00
Plaintiff 	Economic
Damages
Non-
Economic
Damages
Value
(Decedent/
Survivor)
Solatium
Damages
(Relatives Only)
20%
Departure
Value(s)
Solatium
Award
(Relatives Only)
Total Damages
Prior to
Trebling Under
18 U.S.C.
2333(a)
Melissa
Conklin
$1,308,506.00 	$5,200,000.00 	$6,240,000.00 	$7,548,506.00
Adriana
Jones
$1,299,899.00 	$5,200,000.00 	$6,240,000.00 	$7,539,899.00
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 159 of 165

160
Laura
Corina
LeBaron
$1,330,552.00 	$5,200,000.00 	$6,240,000.00 	$7,570,552.00
William
LeBaron
$1,325,583.00 	$5,200,000.00 	$6,240,000.00 	$7,565,583.00
Ruthila
LeBaron
$1,437,822.00 	$5,200,000.00 	$6,240,000.00 	$7,677,822.00
Dayer
LeBaron
$1,424,945.00 	$5,200,000.00 	$6,240,000.00 	$7,664,945.00
Javier
LeBaron
$1,462,555.00 	$5,200,000.00 	$6,240,000.00 	$7,702,555.00
Miguel
LeBaron
$1,497,138.00 	$5,200,000.00 	$6,240,000.00 	$7,737,138.00
Matthew
LeBaron
$1,545,638.00 	$5,200,000.00 	$6,240,000.00 	$7,785,638.00
Johnson Family
Estate of
Christina
Langford
$7,710,017.00 	$11,550,000.00 	$19,260,017.00
Tyler
Johnson
$4,132,610.00 	$15,300,000.00 	$18,360,000.00 	$22,492,610.00
C.J. 	$3,020,645.00 	$10,400,000.00 	$12,480,000.00 	$15,500,645.00
J.J. 	$3,081,303.00 	$10,400,000.00 	$12,480,000.00 	$15,561,303.00
T.J. Jr. 	$3,229,694.00 	$10,400,000.00 	$12,480,000.00 	$15,709,694.00
H.J. 	$3,423,974.00 	$10,400,000.00 	$12,480,000.00 	$15,903,974.00
E.J. 	$3,551,362.00 	$10,400,000.00 	$12,480,000.00 	$16,031,362.00
F.M.J. 	$3,747,500.00 	$7,680,000.00 	$10,400,000.00 	$12,480,000.00 	$23,907,500.00
Amelia
Sedgwick
$914,662.00 	$16,800,000.00 	$16,800,000.00 	$17,714,662.00
Isaac
Langford
$1,432,556.00 	$5,200,000.00 	$6,240,000.00 	$7,672,556.00
Elizabeth
Langford
$1,524,309.00 	$5,200,000.00 	$6,240,000.00 	$7,764,309.00
Plaintiff 	Economic
Damages
Non-
Economic
Damages
Value
(Decedent/
Survivor)
Solatium
Damages
(Relatives Only)
20%
Departure
Value(s)
Solatium
Award
(Relatives Only)
Total Damages
Prior to
Trebling Under
18 U.S.C.
2333(a)
Serina
Langford
$1,544,444.00 	$5,200,000.00 	$6,240,000.00 	$7,784,444.00
E.L 	$1,630,834.00 	$5,200,000.00 	$6,240,000.00 	$7,870,834.00
Ray Family
Karen
Woolley
$517,644.00 	$16,800,000.00 	$16,800,000.00 	$17,317,644.00
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 160 of 165

161
Jaremy Ray 	$982,722.00 	$5,200,000.00 	$6,240,000.00 	$7,222,722.000
Kerah Ray 	$1,079,486.00 	$5,200,000.00 	$6,240,000.00 	$7,319,486.00
Justin Ray 	$1,126,347.00 	$5,200,000.00 	$6,240,000.00 	$7,366,347.00
James Ray 	$1,172,228.00 	$5,200,000.00 	$6,240,000.00 	$7,412,228.00
Jonathan
Ray
$1,172,228.00 	$5,200,000.00 	$6,240,000.00 	$7,412,228.00
Amber Ray 	$1,304,210.00 	$5,200,000.00 	$6,240,000.00 	$7,544,210.00
The Court further awards damages in the following amounts to each Plaintiff in the
Langford action:
Plaintiff 	Economic
Damages
Non-
Economic
Damages
Total
Solatium
Damages
20%
Departure
Value(s)
Solatium
Award
(Relatives Only)
Total
Damages
Prior to
Trebling
Under 18
U.S.C.
2333(a)
Langford Family
K.L. 	$5,480,354.00 	$10,970,000.00 	$36,400,000.00 	$40,560,000.00 	$57,010,354.00
M.L. 	$6,281,667.00 	$10,970,000.00 	$36,400,000.00 	$40,560,000.00 	$57,811,667.00
X.L. 	$6,884,685.00 	$10,970,000.00 	$36,400,000.00 	$40,560,000.00 	$58,414,685.00
Plaintiff 	Economic
Damages
Non-
Economic
Damages
Total Solatium
Damages
20%
Departure
Value(s)
Solatium
Award
(Relatives Only)
Total
Damages
Prior to
Trebling
Under 18
U.S.C.
2333(a)
B.L. 	$7,165,252.00 	$10,970,000.00 	$36,400,000.00 	$40,560,000.00 	$58,695,252.00
C.L. 	$6,407,831.00 	$13,160,000.00 	$36,400,000.00 	$40,560,000.00 	$60,127,831.00
D.L. 	$6,222,562.00 	$7,680,000.00 	$36,400,000.00 	$40,560,000.00 	$54,462,562.00
J.L. 	$6,796,026.00 	$7,680,000.00 	$36,400,000.00 	$40,560,000.00 	$55,036,026.00
Crystal
Langford
$3,700,000.00 	N/A 	$39,000,000.00 	$43,160,000.00 	$46,860,000.00
Brandy Spenst 	$3,700,000.00 	N/A 	$39,000,000.00 	$43,160,000.00 	$46,860,000.00
Joseph Cole
Langford
$3,700,000.00 	N/A 	$39,000,000.00 	$43,160,000.00 	$46,860,000.00
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 161 of 165

162
Bryce Langford 	$3,700,000.00 	N/A 	$39,000,000.00 	$43,160,000.00 	$46,860,000.00
Estate of
Dawna Ray
$740,030.00 	$15,361,500.00 	N/A 	N/A 	$16,101,530.00
Estate of T.L. 	$497,188.00 	$11,550,000.00 	N/A 	N/A 	$12,047,188.00
Estate of R.L. 	$485,712.00 	$11,550,000.00 	N/A 	N/A 	$12,035,712.00
David
Langford
$1,860,150.00 	$57,200,000.00 	$61,360,000.00 	$63,220,150.00
Both economic and non-economic damages are subject to trebling of damages under the
18 U.S.C. § 2333(a). 	Accordingly, the final award of damages each Plaintiff in the Miller and
Langford actions are as follows:
Miller Family
Plaintiff 	Treble Damages
Estate of Maria Rhonita
LeBaron
$160,080,480.00
Estate of H.M. Jr. 	$160,630,344.00
Estate of K.B.M. 	$159,523,290.00
Estate of T.A.M. 	$162,755,226.00
Estate of T.G.M. 	$161,182,074.00
Howard Miller 	$228,271,305.00
T.M. 	$142,410,183.00
A.M. 	$145,592,751.00
Z.M. 	$144,725,319.00
Adrian LeBaron-Soto 	$52,578,447.00
Bathsheba Shalom Tucker 	$53,252,457.00
Rholena Lian Johnson 	$22,442,025.00
Melissa Conklin 	$22,645,518.00
Adriana Jones 	$22,619,697.00
Laura Corina LeBaron 	$22,711,656.00
William LeBaron 	$22,696,749.00
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 162 of 165

163
Ruthila LeBaron 	$23,033,466.00
Dayer LeBaron 	$22,994,835.00
Javier LeBaron 	$23,107,665.00
Miguel LeBaron 	$23,211,414.00
Matthew LeBaron 	$23,356,914.00
TOTAL 	$1,799,821,815.00
Johnson Family
Plaintiff 	Treble Damages
Estate of Christina Langford 	$57,780,051.00
Tyler Johnson 	$67,477,830.00
C.J. 	$46,501,935.00
J.J. 	$46,683,909.00
T.J. Jr. 	$47,129,082.00
H.J. 	$47,711,922.00
E.J. 	$48,094,086.00
F.M.J. 	$71,722,500.00
Amelia Sedgwick 	$53,143,986.00
Isaac Langford 	$23,017,668.00
Elizabeth Langford 	$23,292,927.00
Serina Langford 	$23,353,332.00
E.L 	$23,612,502.00
Total 	$579,521,730.00
Ray Family
Plaintiff 	Treble Damages
Karen Woolley 	$51,952,932.00
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 163 of 165

164
Jaremy Ray 	$21,668,166.00
Kerah Ray 	$21,958,458.00
Justin Ray 	$22,099,041.00
James Ray 	$22,236,684.00
Jonathan Ray 	$22,236,684.00
Amber Ray 	$22,632,630.00
Total 	$184,784,595.00
Langford Family
Plaintiff 	Treble Damages
K.L. 	$171,031,062.00
M.L 	$173,435,001.00
X.L. 	$175,244,055.00
B.L. 	$176,085,756.00
C.L. 	$180,383,493.00
D.L. 	$163,387,686.00
J.L. 	$165,108,078.00
Crystal Langford 	$140,580,000.00
Brandy Spenst 	$140,580,000.00
Joseph Cole Langford 	$140,580,000.00
Bryce Langford 	$140,580,000.00
Estate of Dawna Ray 	$48,304,590.00
Estate of T.L. 	$36,141,564.00
Estate of R.L. 	$36,107,136.00
David Langford 	$189,660,450.00
Total 	$2,077,208,871.00
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 164 of 165

165
The cumulative trebled damages for all of the Plaintiffs is $4,641,337,011.
The Court further awards prejudgment interest to all economic and non-economic damages
(including solatium damages) from November 4, 2019 through the date of this final judgment at a
rate of 6.5% applied annually, non-compounding.
The Court further awards postjudgment interest to the final judgment amounts in the
percentage permitted pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1961(a).
JUDGMENT SHALL BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.
Dated this 24th day of June, 2022.
/s/ Clare R. Hochhalter
Clare R. Hochhalter, Magistrate judge
United States District Court
Case 1:20-cv-00132-CRH Document 63 Filed 06/24/22 Page 165 of 165