Law Center Search Results

The Supreme Court clarified 6/5/06 the proximate cause requirement of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-1968, in the context of a claim between two competing businesses. The Court held that the plaintiff’s loss of customers was not proximately caused by the defendant’s alleged fraud—a failure to collect and remit sales tax owed to New York State, which enabled the defendant to lower prices and take the plaintiff’s customers. First, the Court stated that the direct victim of the fraud was New York, not the plaintiff. Second, the harm that the plaintiff suffered was caused by different acts (lower prices) than the acts that constituted the RICO violation (tax fraud). Third, the Court reasoned that it would be difficult to determine whether the tax fraud allowed the defendant to lower prices, or even that the defendant’s lower prices caused the plaintiff’s business losses. Overall, the Court determined that the alleged harm was too attenuated from the racketeering activity to allow a civil action. Justices Thomas and Breyer disagreed with the Court’s conclusion that proximate cause was not sufficiently alleged, but Justice Breyer concluded that the plaintiff’s claims were insufficient on other grounds. This decision is significant to all businesses as it clarifies the limits of an increasingly common cause of action among business competitors.