Hannosh v. Segal

How courts have described this case

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

• affirming dismissal because plaintiff failed to allege an injury to business, property, 21 or person
• defining racketeering as “any act or preparatory act committed for financial gain, chargeable or indictable under the law where the act occurred and punishable by more than a year’s imprisonment”
• “[W]e generally will not consider arguments that were not presented to the trial court for the first time on appeal . . . .”
• \A 'pattern of racketeering activity' means that there must be at least two related and continuous acts of racketeering.\
• appellate court generally will not consider arguments that were not presented to the trial court
• “We look to federal interpretation for guidance where the federal and state RICO statutes contain similar provisions.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).