Windsor Associates, Inc. v. Greenfeld

How courts have described this case

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

• holding Rule 9(b) satisfied, allowing plaintiffs to use discovery to reveal the “particular circumstances regarding the alleged mail fraud such as the relevant dates the mails were used to perpetrate defendants’ kickback scheme”
• also finding racketeering injury \analytically indistinguishable\ from argument that RICO applies only to organized crime
• “Without exception, the many courts that have considered the question have all concluded that Rule 9(b
• complaint detailing each defendant’s role in and benefit received from kickback scheme sufficiently “apprise[d] defendants of the scheme they allegedly devised to defraud plaintiffs, the acts allegedly undertaken pursuant to that scheme, and what was obtained thereby”
• following Schacht — does not decide the issue

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).