Federal Lawyer

Product Description

A. Introduction 1
1. Overview 1
2. Guidelines for Bringing Civil RICO Lawsuits 3
B. Prior Approval by the Organized Crime and Racketeering Section
of All Government Civil RICO Lawsuits is Required 6
1. Approval Authority and Process 6
2. Post-Complaint Duties 8
II. OVERVIEW OF EQUITABLE RELIEF, CIVIL RICO, AND ITS
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 10
A. Origins and General Nature of Courts’ Equitable Authority 10
1. Origins of Court’s Equitable Authority 10
2. Courts Are Vested With Broad Equitable Powers To Remedy
Unlawful Conduct, Including Ordering Intrusive, Structural
Changes in Wrongdoers’ Entities and Practices 13
B. Congressional Findings and Purposes Regarding Civil RICO 16
C. Congress Designed 18 U.S.C. § 1964 (a) to Authorize District Courts
To Impose the Full Panoply of Equitable Relief 18
1. Injunctions 21
2. Divestiture, Dissolution and Reorganization 21
3. Disgorgement 22
iv
PAGE
4. Limitations on Future Activities and Removal from Positions
in an Entity 25
5. Appointment of Court Officers 26
D. Civil RICO, 18 U.S.C. § 1964, is Patterned After Antitrust Laws,
and Hence Vests the Attorney General of the United States With the
Exclusive Authority to Obtain Equitable Relief, and Vests Private
Litigants, But Not the United States, With the Authority to Sue for
Treble Damages 26
E. Equitable Relief Available Under Civil RICO is at Least As Broad As
Equitable Relief Under the Antitrust Laws, If Not Broader 33
III. ELEMENTS OF GOVERNMENT CIVIL RICO LAWSUITS AND
DEFENSES 38
A. Standards For Obtaining Equitable Relief 38
1. The Government Must Establish a Reasonable Likelihood of
Future Violations By a Preponderance of the Evidence 38
2. Making Due Provision for the Rights of Innocent Persons 41
B. Substantive Issues In Proving Government Civil RICO Claims 43
1. A Defendant’s Liability For A Racketeering Act May Be Based
On “Aiding and Abetting” 43
2. Principles of Respondeat Superior 47
3. A Corporation’s or Labor Union’s Scienter May Be Established
By The Collective Knowledge of The Corporation’s or Labor
Union’s Employees and Representatives 52
4. The Prohibition Against Intracorporate Conspiracies Under
The Antitrust Laws Does Not Apply To Government Civil
RICO Lawsuits 59
C. Certain Defenses Do Not Apply to Government Civil RICO Actions
For Equitable Relief 61
v
PAGE
1. Laches and Statute of Limitations 61
2. United States’ Civil RICO Claims Cannot Be Implicitly Waived 64
3. Equitable Estoppel Can Not Lie Against the United States, If
Ever, Absent Affirmative Misconduct 66
4. The United States Is Not Subject to the Defenses of Unclean
Hands or In Pari Delicto 69
D. Collateral Estoppel 71
IV. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 75
A. Serving the Summons 75
B. General Principles Governing Subject Matter and Personal Jurisdiction 79
1. Subject Matter Jurisdiction 79
2. Due Processing Requirements for State Courts’ Exercise of In
Personam Jurisdiction Under the Fourteenth Amendment as to
State Claims 79
3. Due Process Requirements Under the Fifth Amendment for
Federal Courts’ Exercising In Personam Jurisdiction Over
Federal Causes of Action 85
C. Civil RICO’s Jurisdiction and Venue Provision 87
1. Overview of Civil RICO’s Jurisdiction and Venue Provision 88
2. The Bases for Venue Under Section 1965(a) 91
a. The District In Which Such Person “Resides” 91
b. “Found” 91
c. “Has an Agent” 92
d. “Transacts His Affairs” 92
3. Nationwide Service of Process Under Section 1965(b) 93
vi
PAGE
4. Transfer of Venue – Forum Non-Conveniens 95
V. PROCEDURAL MATTERS 96
A. Expedition of Actions 96
B. Adequacy of the Pleading and Drafting the Complaint 96
1. Adequacy of the Pleading 96
a. General Principles 96
b. Application of Civil Rule 9(b) 100
2. Drafting the Complaint 102
C. There is No Right to a Jury Trial on Claims for Equitable Relief 104
D. Standards Governing Motions for Summary Judgment 109
1. General Principles 109
2. Issues of Intent Generally are Ill-Suited for Summary Judgment 113
VI. DISCOVERY 114

Civil RICO: 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-1968 A Manual for Federal Attorneys

Blue’s lawyer plans to amend suit
The owner of Blue, the dog ordered destroyed for biting a child’s face, plans to amend his lawsuit against the city of Albany to drop any federal constitutional claims and remove Judge Robert T. Scott as a respondent.

Published Mar 7, 2011.
Read more: Albany Democrat-Herald

Federal