Jeffrey Hecht v. Commerce Clearing House, Inc., William Miller, Louis Ceccoli, and Stanley Stephens

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the loss of employment for failure to cooperate in RICO scheme was not proximately caused by racketeering activity because the employee was not “the target of the racketeering enterprise”
• holding that claim for loss of future commissions was “too speculative to confer standing”
• noting that stating a civil fraud conspiracy claim requires pleading ʺunderlying acts of fraudʺ with particularity
• explaining that “the core of a RICO civil conspiracy is an agreement to commit predicate acts”
• stating that “the RICO pattern or acts proximately cause a plaintiff’s injury if they are a substantial factor in the sequence of responsible causation, and if the injury is reasonably foreseeable or anticipated as a natural consequence.”
• dismissing RICO claims where plaintiff was neither the target of the racketeering enterprise nor a competitor or customer of the racketeer

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).