But soon, the families of all three men -- shot down and killed last year by Cuban MiG fighter pilots -- could be the first plaintiffs in a wrongful-death suit to stake a claim to Cuban bank accounts that were confiscated by the United States.
Last year, their families sued the Republic of Cuba and its air force after the three men died while aboard two Cessnas that flew in the service of Miami-based Brothers to the Rescue. The family of a fourth victim, Pablo Morales, could not join the suit because he was not an American citizen.
In mid-November, family lawyers presented their case before a federal judge in Miami. They staked a claim for a combined $79.9 million in compensatory and punitive damages.
Cuba did not defend itself and was found in default by Senior U.S. District Judge James Lawrence King, who has yet to rule on the damages.
But if King endorses the families' request, the judge is certain to trigger a collection effort that will enter uncharted legal waters. Indeed, after closing arguments last week, the families' attorneys were vague about how they would go about executing any judgment against Cuba and its air force.
But the most likely source of funding, they suggested, would be the Cuban assets that were frozen by the U.S. government more than three decades ago.
``We have not turned to that process,'' said Miami lawyer Aaron Podhurst, one of several attorneys representing the families. ``You can always get a law in Congress. One has the legal right to ask Congress. The president has the right to free up those assets administratively.''
Last year, President Clinton did just that -- dipped into the pot and distributed $1.2 million in increments of $300,000 to each of four families that lost loved ones on the doomed flights. Presumably, Clinton could again authorize the distribution of whatever figure the judge approves.
As of last week, a Treasury Department spokeswoman said, the U.S. government was holding $148 million in frozen Cuban assets.
One caveat: Not all of the money belongs to the Cuban government. An unknown percentage belongs to private citizens who lived on the island when the United States imposed its embargo in the early 1960s.
As of 1991, there were 1,300 accounts belonging to people in that category. That year, the Treasury Department announced that the accounts' owners or their heirs had the right to request their return. The spokeswoman had no information on how much belongs to the Cuban government.
Another problem: The Clinton administration has no apparent plan of action for accommodating successful plaintiffs under the Anti-Terrorism Act of 1996 -- which made the families' court action possible in the first place.
The act permits lawsuits in U.S. courts against foreign governments that are found to have sponsored ``extrajudicial killings'' of U.S. citizens -- that is, outside the offending nation's jurisdiction.
But the collection process is less defined.
``We don't like to get involved in hypotheticals,'' said an administration official who declined to be named. ``If there were to be a ruling in favor of the plaintiffs, I don't know what the U.S. government position would be on that. There is a flurry of speculation about what will happen.''
A congressional aide speculated that the plaintiffs could pursue money that Cuban President Fidel Castro himself is rumored to have stashed in European bank accounts.
Another long-range option advanced by the lawyers is that the eventual passing of Castro might lead to a Washington-Havana rapprochement and a possible resolution of the case.
Podhurst and his co-counsel would prefer that the U.S. government provide some follow-through on a law that until now has gone untested.
``Logically, they should want to enforce a statute which they passed as recently as 1996,'' Podhurst said. ``I think we have a shot at it. Hopefully, we'll get somewhere.''
Copyright © 1997 The Miami Herald