C.F. et al. v. Alternative Family Services et al.

CASE NAME: C.F. et al. v. Alternative Family Services et al.

TYPE OF CASE: Sexual abuse; neglience

COURT: Sonoma County Superior Court

JUDGE(S): Judge Patrick M. Broderick

PLAINTIFF LAWYERS: Abbey, Weitzenberg, Warren & Emery P.C., Scott R. Montgomery, Natasha E. Berg, Kaitlyn D. Wright; The Law Office of Johann Hall, Johann Hall

DEFENSE LAWYERS: Friedenthal, Hefferman & Brown LLP, Daniel R. Friedenthal

To convince a jury that a private company was negligent when it placed three young foster children in the home of a man who abused them for several months, Scott R. Montgomery showed the jurors a deck of 180 PowerPoint slides as part of his closing argument.

"We really like to overprepare," Montgomery explained. "I think we outprepared [the defense], outworked them. And I think factually we were right."

The jury agreed. After a 21/2-month trial, it awarded the three young siblings nearly $24 million in compensatory damages, and it assigned 60% of the liability to Alternative Family Services Inc., the private contractor in charge of overseeing the placement of foster children in Sonoma County. C.F. v. Martinez, SCV264540 (Sonoma Super. Ct., filed May 31, 2019).

"I think it was a righteous case, and I think we worked really, really hard to bring it to a conclusion that that's really fair and that's going to help these children," Montgomery said.

The children were 2, 5 and 7 in spring 2018 when Alternative Family Services placed them in the home of Mark Martinez and his family. Although that family had fostered many other children with no reports of problems, Martinez abused the children for the two months they were in his home. He is now serving a life sentence in prison.

JOHANN HALL

The plaintiffs accused the company of negligence in the vetting of the home and the supervision of the children when they were there. The company did not even follow its own detailed protocols, plaintiffs' co-counsel Johann Hall said.

"For example, the protocols very specifically require a certain amount of interviews, including at least one individual interview with everybody that lives in the home," Hall said. But AFS did not do that in this case, he said.

Montgomery said individual interviews are also required by state regulations. "They did so many things wrong," he said about Alternative Family Services.

The company, which oversees foster children and foster homes for many Northern California counties, countered at trial that its personnel followed all required procedures in this case, including visiting the Martinez home weekly while the children were there.

Lead defense attorney Daniel Friedenthal noted that the court is set to hear motions for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and for a new trial on Feb. 23.

Before going to trial, the plaintiffs' attorneys tested their evidence and arguments before several focus groups totaling around 100 people. The focus groups "were pretty overwhelming" in "telling us that we were right, which is always good to hear," Montgomery said.

"As soon as you tell someone about it's a case about child sex abuse, they have no problem with awarding a significant amount of damages because ... everyone knows what this does to people over the course of their life."

The attorneys said they hope the substantial verdict encourages better vetting and supervision of foster homes.

"If you want to ... get paid to do this type of work for the county, then you need to do it right because if you do it wrong, we're going to hold you accountable," Montgomery said.

-- Don DeBenedictis