Page 1
C.A. Affirms $14 Million Judgment Against Murderer
By a MetNews Staff Writer
The Sixth District Court of Appeal on Friday affirmed a $14 million judgment against a man who ordered the slaying of the plaintiff’s father, but reversed a $1 million punitive-damage award because there was an insufficient showing of the defendant’s assets.
A jury awarded plaintiff Alexandra Achilli $20 million in noneconomic damages, but found that defendant Esequiel “Paul” Garcia who commissioned the March 14, 2008 “hit” on Mark Achilli, was liable for 70 percent of the award. It also awarded $25 million in punitive damages but Santa Clara Superior Court Judge Drew Takaichi pared that to $1 million with the plaintiff’s consent, as an alternative to the judge granting a new trial.
Garcia ordered the slaying of the victim because the two were rival suitors of a woman. His conviction of murder in the first degree is now final.
The appeals court’s unpublished opinion was authored by Justice Cynthia C. Lie.
Rejecting Garcia’s insistence that the award of noneconomic damages is so high as to “shock the conscience,” Lie said:
“In its order on Garcia’s motion for new trial, the trial court found ‘there was substantial and compelling evidence of the noneconomic damages of [Achilli] from the loss of her father’s love, companionship, comfort, assistance, affection, moral support, training and guidance, all proximately caused by her father’s murder by defendants. The jury received evidence of Plaintiff s father’s life expectancy that he had prior to his death.’ On that basis, the trial court denied Garcia’s motion for new trial on the issue of noneconomic compensatory damages. The trial judge’s determination that a damages award is not excessive is entitled to great weight and ‘all presumptions are in favor of the decision of the trial court.’…Here, the trial court’s assessment was supported by substantial evidence that went unchallenged before the jury.”
The plaintiff’s father and his business partner had sold two restaurants to Garcia, one for $1.2 million—paid for in cash—and the other for $660,000. Evidence of the defendant’s assets came in the form of testimony from the business partner as to Garcia’s financial condition at the time of the 2007 transactions.
But, Lie pointed out, that was nine years before the trial of the civil action, and Garcia now contends he lacks funds. The jurist said:
“There is no question that the murder established by Garcia’s final judgment of conviction merits punishment, both carceral and financial. Nevertheless, without evidence of Garcia’s financial condition at the time of trial, there was no basis to determine the level of punitive damages necessary to properly punish and deter.
“Absent a record of obstruction of pretrial discovery, we have no choice but to reverse the trial court’s award of punitive damages. As Achilli acknowledged at oral argument, reversal for insufficiency of the evidence does not entitle her to a new trial on punitive damages.”
The case is Achilli v. Garcia, H044731.
Copyright 2022, Metropolitan News Company