Gross v. Waywell

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “RICO’s enchantment, like the siren’s song, has again drawn another crew of spellbound plaintiffs foundering against the rocks”
• stating that Rule 9(b) and Twombly’s plausibility test “demands greater specificity” in pleadings where mail and/or wire fraud are the predicate offenses
• noting that “personal or emotional damages do not qualify” as “injury to ‘business or property1 ”
• noting that a single-victim scheme that rises to the level of a RICO pattern is “rare”
• explaining that “personal or emotional damages do not qualify”
• explaining that “personal or emotional damages do not qualify”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).