Bivens Gardens Office Building, Inc. v. Barnett Banes of Florida, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that party that strategically withheld motion to recuse until after receiving unfavorable outcome at trial would not be allowed to raise it for the first time in conjunction with motion for post- judgment relief
• explaining that the allegedly unlawful act “affected creditors in a manner distinct from shareholders, and in a manner sufficiently direct to confer RICO standing on Konstand in his capacity as a creditor”
• explaining that the allegedly unlawful act “affected creditors in a manner distinct from shareholders, and in a manner sufficiently direct to confer RICO standing on Konstand in his capacity as a creditor”
• noting that a shareholder or a limited partner in a company that was the target of the alleged RICO violation does not have standing to sue for the losses he sustained as a result of the racketeering activity against the company
• “[T]he test for RICO standing is whether the alleged injury was directly caused by the RICO violation, not whether such harm was reasonably foreseeable.”
• “A creditor will [not] have RICO standing ... if the injury alleged was suffered only as a result of harm to the corporation.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).