Illinois Central R. R. v. Laloge

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding the plaintiffs had sufficiently alleged wire fraud where, among other things, they alleged that the defendants “personally made misrepresentations . . . over telephone, emails, and through the internet”
• dismissing a civil RICO claim for lack of allegations of racketeering activity where “[t]he plaintiffs have failed to identify any specific act of CA Partners committing wire fraud, let alone establishing the commission of two or more predicate acts”
• an employee of Total Gym Repairs, Mr. Ramotar, was employed by GDRI for more than sixteen years as a Safe Path technician
• competitor failed to allege “facts to show . . . luxury real estate transactions” affected “consumers at large”
• “Courts have repeatedly dismissed § 1962(c) claims alleging that a corporation was simultaneously a RICO ‘person’ and a RICO ‘enterprise’ (or part of a RICO ‘enterprise’ from which the corporation is not distinct).”
• “Sections 349 and 350 contain a ‘territoriality’ requirement: to state a claim under either provision, the deception of consumers must occur in New York.” (citing Goshen, 98 N.Y.2d at 325)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).