Eight jurors in Judge J. P. Boulee's Atlanta courtroom returned "our unanimous verdict" on September 23, 2026, and an insurer's declaratory action already names all four plaintiffs.
Eight jurors returned the first verdict among four related federal trafficking suits against the former owner of a College Park, Georgia, Super 8 in Judge J. P. Boulee's Atlanta court on September 23, 2026. Two plaintiffs with their own pending suits had testified before this jury, according to the trial minutes and the pretrial order. The verdict form says, "This is our unanimous verdict, reached on September 23, 2026." The jurors awarded J.R. $164 million. Three related suits remained pending against the same former owner.
The September 25 judgment turned that verdict into an entered award against Lincoln Bancorp, LLC: $44 million in compensatory damages and $120 million in punitive damages. In this record, Lincoln Bancorp, LLC appears as a former owner of the hotel at 4979 Old National Highway. Its own July case outline says it owned the property from December 30, 2019, through December 6, 2021. The three other plaintiffs, T.H., N.N. and D.B., have related federal actions arising from alleged minor sex trafficking at that address, according to the pretrial order. Their cases have their own dockets. The first judgment does not enter damages for any of them.
The route to that number narrowed before the jury was seated. In the September 16 pretrial order, Lincoln Bancorp stated: "For purposes of trial, Defendant admits liability on Plaintiff's beneficiary-liability claim under 18 U.S.C. § 1595(a)." Causation and damages remained for trial. Lincoln Bancorp also asked to hold punitive damages and fees for a later phase. A September 18 minute entry records Judge Boulee's decision in one line: "The Court conducted a teleconference and denied Defendant's request to bifurcate." The jury would hear the damages case together.
The 11 sources behind this story: 11 court records, each linked with what it shows. Free with the weekly Litigation Sentinel brief.
Two plaintiffs from the related suits testified in J.R.'s trial. On September 21, the court seated eight jurors and read them a joint statement about Lincoln Bancorp's liability and admissions, according to the first-day minute sheet. N.N. testified that day. The next day's sheet records that N.N. finished her testimony, T.H. testified, and both sides rested. N.N. and T.H. are also named as plaintiffs in the related suits listed in the pretrial order. Their appearance in this trial did not decide their own claims.
Patrick J. McDonough, listed as J.R.'s counsel in the pretrial order, had that testimony in the record when the case reached closings. The September 23 minute sheet records closings, the charge and the verdict. It also records the court adopting the plaintiff's brief on affirmative defenses to beneficiary liability. The verdict form gives the result without predicting the next case. Eight jurors answered yes on causation and TVPRA liability and wrote separate compensatory and punitive figures. A week earlier, the question had been how much of this dispute would reach them. By Wednesday, they had supplied both numbers.
One defense position survived in the paper trail, though it did not reduce the judgment as entered. Lincoln Bancorp's July outline said punitive damages were "subject to a statutory cap." That was the defendant's position, not a court ruling. The entered judgment carries the full $120 million punitive award. Whether Lincoln Bancorp presses that point after trial is open.
Free weekly intelligence for executives responsible for litigation exposure: the named decision-makers, dollar exposure, operating consequence, and next development.
The first judgment supplies a jury price for one plaintiff's claim within a four-suit group against the same property. The other three still need their own outcomes. The pretrial order identifies T.H., N.N. and D.B. by initials and separate case numbers; it does not combine their claims into J.R.'s judgment. Two of those plaintiffs testified in the first trial, so this was no abstract collection of similar complaints. The testimony crossed into J.R.'s record. The verdict did not cross into theirs.
A separate federal docket had opened before the trial began. CourtListener's docket metadata shows that Evanston Insurance Company filed an insurance declaratory-judgment action on June 22 naming Lincoln Bancorp and all four plaintiffs. It also shows a joint motion to extend the answer deadline entered on September 24, the day after the verdict. The complaint itself is not posted on CourtListener, so what Evanston asks the court to declare, and its position on coverage, remain unknown. The filing establishes another court fight involving the same four claims; it establishes no answer to who will pay the judgment.
The first case has moved from admission to verdict to judgment. The related cases remain separate, and Evanston's declaratory action remains a separate filing. The September 25 judgment carries $164 million. The next thread in J.R.'s docket is the post-trial choice. October 23 is the calculated 28-day mark under Rules 50(b) and 59 after that judgment, not a date set in a court order. Whether Lincoln Bancorp asks Judge Boulee to disturb the award is still open.
J.R. v. Lincoln Bancorp, LLC, N.D. Ga. No. 1:25-cv-04629, ECF 122, verdict form, September 23, 2026.
The Executive Briefing has five questions about your reported litigation practices. Use the summary to choose an operating question to explore.
Take the Executive Briefing →Free weekly intelligence for executives responsible for litigation exposure: the named decision-makers, dollar exposure, operating consequence, and next development.