Corbacho Daudinot v. Puig Valdes et al

Filing 48

Defendants' ANSWER and Affirmative Defenses to Amended Complaint by YASIEL PUIG VALDES, MARITZA VALDES GONZALEZ. (Santini, Sean)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
MIAMI DIVISION
CASE NO. 13-CV-22589-KMW

MIGUEL ANGEL CORBACHO DAUDINOT,
Plaintiff,
v.
YASIEL PUIG VALDES a/k/a YASIEL PUIG
and MARITZA VALDES GONZALEZ,
Defendants.
____________________________________/
DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO SECOND
AMENDED COMPLAINT
Defendants, YASIEL PUIG VALDES (“Puig”) and MARITZA VALDES
GONZALEZ (‘Valdes”) (collectively, “defendants”), hereby answer Plaintiff’s
Second Amended Complaint (“Complaint”) and assert the affirmative
defenses set forth below:
1.

Defendants deny that the allegations in the Complaint confer

subject matter jurisdiction under the Torture Victim Protection Act of 1991
(TVPA) 28 U.S.C. § 1350, note,§ 2(a) and 28 U.S.C. § 1331.
2.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 2.

3.

Defendants admit that Puig is a Cuban citizen residing in Miami,

Florida.
4.

Defendants admit that Valdes is a Cuban citizen residing in

Miami, Florida.
5.

Admitted that plaintiff seeks damages in excess of $75,000;

however, defendants deny that plaintiff is entitled to any damages from
defendants.
6.

Defendants deny providing any false or misleading denunciation

against plaintiff, Corbacho Daudinot (“plaintiff”). Defendants are without
knowledge of the remaining allegations in paragraph 6.
7.

Admitted that Puig was and is an internationally acclaimed

baseball player and a Cuban citizen. Admitted that Puig defected from Cuba
in 2012, was subsequently retained by the Major League Baseball team, the
Los Angeles Dodgers, and maintains a permanent residence in Miami,
Florida.

Admitted that Puig truthfully testified in plaintiff’s trial in Cuba.

Defendants deny that Puig on his own volition informed authorities of the
INDER about alleged illegal activities committed by plaintiff and filed a
complaint to DCSE against plaintiff. Defendants are without knowledge of
the remaining allegations in paragraph 7.

2

8.

Admitted Puig was sanctioned from playing on the Cuban

national baseball team and the Cuban national series team in 2009.
Defendants deny the remaining allegations of paragraph 8.
9.

Admitted Valdes is Puig’s mother and a Cuban citizen who left

Cuba on or around January 2013 and resides with her son in Miami, Florida.
Defendants deny the remaining allegations in paragraph 9.
10.

Admitted that Puig was sanctioned from playing in the Cuban

national baseball team and the Cuban national Series team of Cienfuegos in
2009. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in paragraph 10.
11.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 11.

12.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 12.

13.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 13.

14.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 14.

15.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 15.

16.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 16.

17.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 17.
18.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 18.

3

19.

Admitted that Puig was aware of Aroldis Chapman’s removal

from the national team in 2008. Defendants deny the remaining allegations
in paragraph 19.
20.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 20.

21.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 21.
22.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 22.

23.

Defendants deny that venue is appropriate in the Southern

District of Florida for allegations of conduct that occurred entirely in Cuba.
24.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 24.

25.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 25.

26.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 26.

27.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 27.

28.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 28.

29.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 29.

30.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 30.

31.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 31.

32.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 32.

33.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 33.

34.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 34.

4

35.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 35.

36.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 36.

37.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 37.
38.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 38.

39.

Admitted that Puig attempted to escape Cuba with Despaigne.

Defendants deny the remaining allegations in paragraph 39.
40.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 40.

41.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 41.

42.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 42.

43.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 43.

44.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 44.

45.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 45.

46.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 46.
47.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 47.

48.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 48.

49.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 49.

50.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 50.

5

51.

Admitted that in early 2010, Puig was a player for el equipo de

desarrollo in Cienfuegos.

Defendants are without knowledge of the

remaining allegations in paragraph 51.
52.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 52.
53.

Defendants are without knowledge of plaintiff’s sentence and

conditions of detention.

Defendants deny the remaining allegations in

paragraph 53.
54.

Admitted that Puig was reinstated into the National Team and the

National Series team.

Defendants deny the remaining allegations in

paragraph 54.
55.

Admitted that Despaigne approached Puig with a plan to leave

Cuba that was arranged by financial backers in the United States.
Defendants deny the remaining allegations in paragraph 55.
56.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 56.
57.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 57.
58.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 58.

6

59.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 59.
60.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 60.
61.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 61.
62.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 62.
63.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 63.
64.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 64.
65.

Admitted that plaintiff and Orozco approached Valdes at her

neighbor’s home to ask where they could find Puig. Defendants are without
knowledge of the remaining allegations in paragraph 65.
66.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 66.

67.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 67.
68.

Admitted that Puig was having ice cream at an establishment in

Coopelia, Cuba when he was approached by plaintiff and Orozco, who asked

7

him whether he was interested in leaving Cuba. Defendants further admit
that that Orozco provided Puig with cash and a cell phone. Defendants deny
the remaining allegations in paragraph 68.
69.

Defendants’ answer paragraph 69 by referring to their answer to

paragraph 68. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in paragraph 69.
70.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 70.
71.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 71.
72.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 72.
73.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 73.
74.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 74.
75.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 75.
76.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 76.

8

77.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 77.
78.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 78.
79.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 79.
80.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 80.
81.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 81.
82.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 82.
83.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 83.
84.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 84.
85.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 85.
86.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 86.

9

87.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 87.
88.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 88 regarding the evidence produced by the prosecution against
plaintiff. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in paragraph 88.
89.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 89.
90.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 90.

91.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 91.

92.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 92.
93.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 93.

94.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 94.

95.

Defendants admit that attached as “Exhibit E” to the Second

Amended is the “fotaba iustrativa,” in which Puig identifies plaintiff in a photo
lineup. Defendants are without knowledge of the remaining allegations in
paragraph 95.
96.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 96.

97.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 97.

10

98.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 98.
99.

Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in

paragraph 99.
100. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 100.
101. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 101.
102. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 102.
103. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 103.
104. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 104.
105. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 105.
106. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 106.
107. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 107.
108. Admitted.

11

109. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 109.
110. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 110.
111. Defendants admit responding truthfully to the compulsory
interrogations by INDER personnel.

Defendants deny the remaining

allegation in paragraph 111.
112. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 112.
113. Defendants admit that Puig responded truthfully to the
compulsory interrogations by DCSE personnel that Orozco had provided him
with a cell phone, that a man from abroad would be calling him, and that
Orozco had planned to return to Cienfuegos for him. Defendants deny the
remaining allegations in paragraph 113.
114. Defendants admit that during the compulsory interrogations by
DCSE personnel, Puig confirmed that he had received multiple calls to the
cell phone that Orozco had given him, that the calls were from Orozco and
another man, and that both men had called to speak to him about leaving
Cuba. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in paragraph 114.
115. Defendants admit that Orozco called Puig to persuade him to
escape the country and that Orozco told Puig his location. Defendants are
without knowledge of the remaining allegations in paragraph 115.
116. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 116.
12

117. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 117.
118. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 118.
119. The declaration referenced in paragraph 119 speaks for itself;
and Defendants deny any allegation that is inconsistent with the written
document. Defendants do not admit the authenticity of the declaration.
Defendants are without knowledge of the remaining allegations in paragraph
119.
120. The declaration referenced in paragraph 120 speaks for itself;
and defendants deny any allegation that is inconsistent with the written
document. Defendants do not admit the authenticity of the declaration.
Defendants deny the remaining allegations in paragraph 120.
121. Admitted.
122. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 121.
123. Admitted that athletes who attempt to flee Cuba are generally
removed from the National Team. Defendants are without knowledge of the
remaining allegations in paragraph 123.
124. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 124.

13

125. Admitted that Puig had been sanctioned by the government and
relegated to the developmental team in Cienfuegos. Admitted that Puig
participated in the 2008 World Junior Baseball Championship and having
played in the Cienfuegos National Series team for the 2008-2009 season.
Defendants deny the remaining allegations in paragraph 125.
126. Admitted that Puig was reinstated into the National Series
baseball team for Cienfuegos and reinstated into the Cuban national
baseball team, which travels outside of the island. Defendants deny the
remaining allegations in paragraph 126.
127. Admitted that Puig, as part of the National Team, traveled to the
2011 World Port Tournament in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, and that Puig
was suspended from baseball subsequently.

Denied that Puig had

attempted to escape while at the 2011 World Port Tournament in Rotterdam,
the Netherlands.

Defendants are without knowledge of the remaining

allegations in paragraph 127.
128. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 128.
129. Defendants admit that Puig was removed from the National team
and relegated to the developmental team rather than the National Series for
the 2009-2010 season.

Defendants deny the remaining allegations in

paragraph 129.
14

130. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 130.
131. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 131.
132. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 132.
133. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 133.
134. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 134.
135. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 135.
136. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 136.
137. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 137.
138. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 138.
139. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 139.
140. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 140.
141. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 141.
142. Admitted that Puig attempted to leave Cuba in Holguin
Providence, Cuba with a group of others, and that the attempt was
intercepted by Cuban authorities. Defendants are without knowledge of the
remaining allegations in paragraph 142.
143. Defendants admit that Puig attempted to escape Cuba from
Central Chaparra, Jesus Menendez municipality, Cuba with a group of
others, that the attempt was intercepted by the coast guard, and that they
15

were returned to Cuba by the coast guard.

Defendants are without

knowledge of the remaining allegations in paragraph 143.
144. Defendants admit that Puig successfully escaped from Cuba
without interception on or around June 2012; that Yunior Despaigne, Lester
Quesada, Jenny Reyes, and others were with Puig during this escape; that
the group landed first on Isla Mujeres, Mexico, where they remained for
approximately one (1) month; that they were subsequently taken to Cancun,
where they stayed for approximately two (2) days; that Puig subsequently
went to Mexico City, where he received Mexican residency; that Jaime
Torres visited with Puig in Mexico City; and that Puig entered the United
States through the U.S./Mexico border after remaining in Mexico City for
approximately twenty (20) days. Defendants deny that Jaime Torres is
Puig’s current sports agent.

Defendants are without knowledge of the

remaining allegations in paragraph 144.
145. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 145.
146. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 146.
147. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 147.

16

148. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 148. 1
149. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 149.
150. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 150.
151. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 151.
152. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 152.
153. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 153.
154. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 154.
155. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 155.

1

Paragraphs 148 through 232 of the Complaint contain general allegations
regarding the Cuban judicial system and the Cuban government’s mistreatment of nonparties that are not connected with this matter. Defendants are unable to properly
investigate these allegations and therefore, respond to these paragraphs by lacking
knowledge.
17

156. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 156.
157. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 157.
158. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 158.
159. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 159.
160. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 160.
161. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 161.
162. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 162.
163. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 163.
164. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 164.
165. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 165.

18

166. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 166.
167. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 167.
168. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 168.
169. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 169.
170. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 170.
171. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 171.
172. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 172.
173. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 173.
174. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 174.
175. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 175.

19

176. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 176.
177. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 177.
178. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 178.
179. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 179.
180. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 180.
181. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 181.
182. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 182.
183. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 183.
184. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 184.
185. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 185.

20

186. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 186.
187. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 187.
188. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 188.
189. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 189.
190. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 190.
191. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 191.
192. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 192.
193. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 193.
194. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 194.
195. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 195.

21

196. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 196.
197. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 197.
198. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 198.
199. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 199.
200. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 200.
201. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 201.
202. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 202.
203. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 203.
204. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 204.
205. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 205.

22

206. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 206.
207. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 207.
208. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 208.
209. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 209.
210. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 210.
211. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 211.
212. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 212.
213. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 213.
214. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 214.
215. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 215.

23

216. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 216.
217. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 217.
218. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 218.
219. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 219.
220. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 220.
221. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 221.
222. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 222.
223. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 223.
224. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 224.
225. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 225.

24

226. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 226.
227. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 227.
228. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 228.
229. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 229.
230. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 230.
231. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 231.
232. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 232.
233. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 233.
234. Admitted that Puig was placed into the developmental team in
Cienfuegos as part of official sanctions against him. Defendants deny the
remaining allegations in paragraph 234.
235. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 235.
236. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 236.

25

237. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 237.
238. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 238.
239. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 239.
240. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 240.
241. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 241.
242. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 242.
243. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 243.
244. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 244.
245. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 245.
246. Defendants deny that Puig had any involvement with a
conspiracy, or had acted pursuant to a conspiracy. Defendants are without
knowledge of the remaining the allegations in paragraph 246.
247. Defendants deny that Valdes had any involvement with a
conspiracy, or acted pursuant to a conspiracy. Defendants are without
knowledge of the remaining the allegations in paragraph 247.
248. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 248.
249. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 249.
250. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 250.
251. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 251.
252. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 252.

26

253. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 253.
254. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 254.
255. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 255.
256. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 256.
257. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 257.
258. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 258.
259. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 259.
260. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 260.
261. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 261.
262. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 262.
263. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 263.
264. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 264.
265. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 265.
266. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 266.
267. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 267.
268. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 268.
269. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 269.
270. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 270.
271. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 271.
272. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 272.

27

273. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 273.
COUNT I
Torture in Violation of TVPA
(Against Puig and Valdes)
274. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 274.
275. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 275.
276. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 276.
277. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 277.
278. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 278.
279. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 279.
280. Defendants are without knowledge of the allegations in
paragraph 280.
281. Defendants deny that plaintiff is entitled to any damages from
defendants. Defendants are without knowledge of the remaining allegations
in paragraph 281.
282. Defendants deny all allegations in the Complaint that are not
specifically admitted herein.

28

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
1.

Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint fails to state a claim

under the TVPA upon which relief can be granted.
2.

Plaintiff’s claim is barred because the Torture Victim Protection

Act (“TVPA”)2 does not apply extraterritorially to the facts of this case.
3.

Plaintiff claim under the TVPA is barred for failure to meet the

TVPA’s definition of torture.
4.

Plaintiff claim of secondary liability under the TVPA is barred

because the defendants never agreed with the Cuban government to bring
about plaintiff’s detention and torture.
5.

Plaintiff’s claim is non-justiciable under the political question

doctrine because adjudication of this case would require this Court to rule on
matters that are constitutionally committed to the political branches of the
government and this Court lacks judicially discoverable and manageable
standards by which it may decide this case.
6.

Plaintiff’s claim is non-justiciable under the doctrine of

international comity. The locus of this case is Cuba and this Court should

2

The TPVA provides, in part: “An individual who, under actual or apparent
authority, or color of law, of any foreign nation – (1) subjects an individual to torture shall,
in a civil action, be liable for damages to that individual.” Torture Victim Protection Act §
2(a), Pub. L. No. 102-256, 106 Stat. 73 (1992) (codified at 28 U.S.C. § 1350 (Historical
and Statutory Notes)).
29

not interfere with Cuba’s sovereignty in regulating illegal human smuggling
and trafficking.
7.

Plaintiff’s claim is barred by international doctrine that immunizes

witnesses from liability for participating in criminal proceedings.
8.

Plaintiff’s’ claim is non-justiciable under the act of state doctrine

as plaintiff asks this Court to sit in judgment of the Cuban criminal justice
system, plaintiff’s trial in Cuba, and Cuba’s enforcement of its anti-trafficking
laws.
9.

Plaintiffs’ claims are un-triable due to the unavailability of critical

witnesses and evidence.
WHEREFORE, defendants demand judgment against plaintiff and
such other relief as the Court deems just and proper.
Respectfully submitted,
SANTINI LAW
1001 Brickell Bay Drive, Suite 2650
Miami, Florida 33131
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

By: /s/ Sean R. Santini
Sean R. Santini
Florida Bar No. 832898
[e-mail]
Averil Andrews
Florida Bar No. 0105700
[e-mail]
30

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on August 8, 2014, I electronically filed the
foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify
that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record
or pro se parties identified on the attached Service List in the manner
specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by
CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those counsel or parties
who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing.

By: /s/ Averil Andrews
Averil Andrews

31

SERVICE LIST
Kenia Bravo, Esq.
[e-mail]
Law Offices of Avelino J. Gonzalez, P.A.
6780 Coral Way
Miami, FL 33155
Avelino Jose Gonzalez, Esq.
[e-mail]
Law Offices of Avelino J. Gonzalez, P.A.
6780 Coral Way
Miami, FL 33155

32