In a 17-page ruling, U.S. District Judge Gregory Presnell granted and denied in part Parvis Sabeti's motion to dismiss a lawsuit for failure to state a claim by three plaintiffs identified pseudonymously as John Doe I, John Doe II and John Doe III, who alleged they were detained and suffered severe torture during the Shah's regime in the 1970s. According to Judge Presnell, the plaintiffs affirmatively allege Sabeti had "effective control" over individuals who tortured them.
Sabeti was accused of being the architect of the "institutionalization of torture" in Iran and the system that caused the Does' detention and denial of due process rights that resulted in imprisonment, because of their perceived political affiliations during the Shah's regime.
The Doe plaintiffs alleged Sabeti was a top official with the Sazman-e Ettela'at va Amniyat-e Keshvar organization in Iran, or SAVAK, which is described as "an intelligence organization and the secret police of the government of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the former Shah of Iran," who was deposed following the country's Islamic revolution in 1979.
SAVAK participated in Iran's Joint Anti-Sabotage Committee — also known as the Committee to Fight Terrorism — which the plaintiffs alleged was designed to control the public by arresting and torturing people. The Doe plaintiffs — who are 85, 72 and 68 years old — alleged they suffered whippings, beatings, electrocution, and forced in stress positions. As deputy director of SAVAK, Sabeti was aware of and signed off on the activities, the plaintiffs alleged.
Despite living in relative obscurity for the last 40 years, Sabeti was tracked down by the plaintiffs after reemerging through the production of a documentary following mass demonstrations against the Islamic Republic in 2023.
Sabeti argued the claims were untimely, and that the suit fails to allege secondary liability against him under the Torture Victim Protection Act. Sabeti also argued the plaintiffs' state-law tort claims cannot apply extraterritorially since those are based on actions by Iranians against Iranians in Iran, which they don't refute.
On Tuesday, Judge Presnell agreed to end the Florida common law claims without prejudice, but permitted the TVPA claim to proceed, pointing out that Sabeti's own motion "proceeds to recite a plethora of plausible allegations plaintiffs have leveled."
"Indeed, to support their summary allegation that defendant 'provided knowing, substantial assistance to the direct perpetrators' of plaintiffs' torture and abuse, the [first amended complaint] exhaustively alleges the extrajudicial, abusive and tortious activities perpetrated by the Third Division of SAVAK — notably — that defendant led this organization," the order said.
The suit also references — which Sabeti overlooks — a slew of reliable sources that included a report sent to the International Commission of Jurists dated back in 1976 that substantiates their claims as to Sabeti's role within SAVAK and his authority over its forces, the order said.
"Nor does defendant acknowledge a 1978 U.S. Central Intelligence Agency report which recognized him as 'Chief of Department 3 (Internal Security) of SAVAK' and even considered him to be a potential candidate to take over as chief of all of SAVAK," the judge wrote.
The plaintiffs also identify their alleged torturers by name and said Sabeti had control over them, the judge added. The suit also adequately alleges a conspiracy theory of secondary liability against Sabeti, the judge said.
The plaintiffs alleged Sabeti, the alleged torturers who are identified by name, and other individuals within the Committee to Fight Terrorism agreed to utilize the purported torture tactics to further their objective to quash political opposition to the regime and carried them out against the plaintiffs, Judge Presnell wrote.
Sabeti was unable to persuade the judge that the plaintiffs fail to establish secondary liability under the command responsibility doctrine or that they insufficiently alleged he possessed effective control over the alleged torturers. Sabeti had argued the plaintiffs don't say these torturers were SAVAK personnel within the Third Division, which is the only group he's accused of steering.
Judge Presnell noted the plaintiffs alleged there was a superior-subordinate relationship given Sabeti's position as head of the division and as committee chair. The plaintiffs also spell out his effective control within the Iranian intel security organization and, specifically, Sabeti's control over the people who tortured them, the order added.
At this juncture, the suit also meets the equitable tolling requirement, Judge Presnell said, rejecting Sabeti's contention that the TVPA claims are time-barred. The plaintiffs alleged that they and many others had no idea where Sabeti was since he fled Iran in 1978, until they discovered his whereabouts through a post on the social media platform X in February 2023.
The suit also said Sabeti hid his identity, and that his daughter affirmed that her family moved, changed their names and went into hiding, the order explained. However, the judge bifurcated the proceedings to determine whether the claims are time-barred, and ordered the equitable tolling issue to proceed to discovery.
In a separate order Tuesday, Judge Presnell also allowed the plaintiffs to proceed under pseudonyms, finding they provided significant evidence of serious, credible threats to their and their families' safety and well-being, as well as their legal counsel.
Furthermore, the plaintiffs allege they continue to suffer significant mental and emotional struggle even just thinking back to their experiences, the order said.
"Plaintiffs' request to proceed pseudonymously is not borne of petty fears of personal embarrassment, it arises from decades of alleged trauma and mental struggle to cognitively process the torture they experienced," Judge Presnell added. "They fear the social stigma that will forever be attached to their names if they must publicly describe and relive the intimate, inhumane details of what they experienced."
Judge Presnell concluded the plaintiffs will only have to disclose their identities to Sabeti's attorneys for discovery that is restricted solely to the issue of equitable tolling.
Representatives for the plaintiffs and Sabeti did not immediately respond to inquiries seeking comment Wednesday.
The plaintiffs are represented by Michelle J. Correll of Correll Law PA, and Sara Cristina Colon and Thomasin K. Bernhardt of Brown Neri Smith & Khan LLP.
Sabeti is represented by Jeffrey E. Marcus and Bryan A. Almeida of Marcus Neiman Rashbaum & Pineiro LLP, and Joshua A. Levy and Justin A. DiCharia of Levy Firestone Muse LLP.
The case is John Doe I et al. v. Parviz Sabeti, case number 6:25-cv-00219, in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida.
--Additional reporting by David Minsky. Editing by Bruce Goldman.
For a reprint of this article, please contact reprints@law360.com.
