MIAMI BUSINESS LITIGATION: CIVIL RICO

The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) is a federal law enacted in 1970 to target organized and white-collar crime by focusing on patterns of criminal activity within an “enterprise” rather than individual crimes. The law was enacted due to concerns associated with organized crime infiltrating businesses. In fact, some say the law was instrumental in dismantling the Mafia because it allowed prosecutors to pursue criminal action against Mafia leaders based on crimes committed by subordinates. However, RICO is not limited to criminal matters because it can be used in civil lawsuits too. The Miami business litigation attorneys of the Mavrick Law Firm represent businesses and their owners in breach of contract litigation and related claims of fraud, non-compete agreement litigation, trade secret litigation, trademark infringement litigation, employment litigation, and other legal disputes in federal and state courts and in arbitration.

Under RICO, it is illegal “for any person employed by or associated with any enterprise engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce, to conduct or participate, directly or indirectly, in the conduct of such enterprise’s affairs through a pattern of racketeering activity….” 18 U.S.C. § 1962. Therefore, to establish a RICO claim, a plaintiff must prove conduct of an enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity. Jones v. Childers, 18 F.3d 899 (11th Cir. 1994). These proof requirements apply whether to civil and criminal RICO claims. However, in civil RICO cases, plaintiffs must satisfy additional requirements. 18 U.S.C. § 1964. Civil RICO plaintiffs must show there was an injury to business or property and that injury resulted from the RICO violation. Plaintiff that are able to establish these facts can be entitled to triple damages. 18 U.S.C.A. § 1964 (“Any person injured in his business or property by reason of a violation of section 1962… may sue… and shall recover threefold the damages he sustains.”).  

Establishing a civil RICO claim can be difficult because the plaintiff must prove a pattern of racketeering activity. This means a plaintiff must establish at least two acts of racketeering activity known as predicate acts. Cox v. Administrator U.S. Steel & Carnegie, 17 F.3d 1386 (11th Cir. 1994); Maiz v. Virani, 253 F.3d 641 (11th Cir. 2001) (“If distinct statutory violations are found, the predicate acts will be considered to be distinct irrespective of the circumstances under which they arose.”). Racketeering activity is defined as any act which is indictable under the Immigration and Nationality Act. In Williams v. Mohawk Indus., Inc., 411 F.3d 1252 (11th Cir. 2005), the plaintiff asserted a RICO claim because the defendant violated federal immigration laws by hiring many undocumented persons. These actions constitute predicate acts because knowingly hiring at least 10 persons that are aliens; concealing, harboring, or shielding aliens from detection that illegally entered the United States; encouraging or inducing aliens to enter the United States knowing that such entry would be illegal are all violations of the Immigration and Nationality Act.

Establishing the existence of an enterprise is much less onerous because enterprises are defined broadly. Enterprises include any individual, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal entity. 18 U.S.C. § 1961. Enterprises can also include any union or group of individuals associated in fact even though they are not a legal entity. Therefore, individuals or companies acting in concert with one another even though they are not incorporated will not preclude the finding of an enterprise. The Miami business litigation lawyers of the Mavrick Law Firm also represent clients in Fort Lauderdale, Boca Raton, and Palm Beach. This article does not serve as a substitute for legal advice tailored to a particular situation.