A judge in Laredo has awarded almost $112 million to the Mexican division of ADT Security Systems, an alarm-system firm, for lost profits in a south-of-the-border extortion scheme.
ADT lawyers said the judgment, entered last week, is a record for Webb County. Because the case involved violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, state District Judge Raul Vasquez was required to triple the jury's $36 million verdict, which with interest amounted to $111.7 million.
Lawyers for the defendants, including Alert 24 Security, LLC; Adelina Federico, an Arizona woman; Jesús Hernández Alcocer, a Mexican national; and Asociados Multidisciplinarios, S.A. de C.V., said they were confident the award would be thrown out on appeal.
ADT lawyers, meanwhile, plan to appeal a $9.2 million award for Alert 24's counterclaim in the case.
In a three-week trial beginning in September, ADT lawyers said the firm had lost millions since it terminated a program with dealers in Mexico, which led to ongoing arbitration in Mexico.
The dealers in turn teamed with Alcocer and Federico to form a service program under Alert 24, which, since it incorporated in Texas, would not be subject to some of the same arbitration laws, the lawyers said. Alert 24 claimed ownership of equipment in some 167,000 homes and businesses and demanded ADT pay for the equipment if ADT wanted to continue service contracts, the lawyers said.
Alcocer used his firm, Asociados Multidisciplinarios, to churn out legal complaints against ADT executives, plaintiff's lawyer John Kazen said. He said his clients would get off planes in Mexico and be greeted by waiting police and trumped-up charges. Some spent days in jail.
“You had 13 different executives get arrested in 27 different lawsuits and (the lawsuits) all end up getting dismissed,” Kazen said.
But the jury did award Alert 24 compensation for the equipment.
“Clearly the jury spoke that there was evidence to support Alert 24,” said defense attorney Marcel Notzon III, adding that the ADT verdict was “in some very dangerous water at the Court of Appeals.”
