Antitrust Law Daily Wrap Up, RICO NEWS: High Court Asked to Decide Whether Plaintiff Must Allege Agreement to Commit Predicate Acts to State RICO Conspiracy Claim, (Apr 3, 2013)

By Tobias J. Gillett, J.D., LL.M.

Individuals who purchased allegedly worthless memberships in travel clubs with financing through FIA Card Services have filed a petition for certiorari in the U.S. Supreme Court seeking review of a Third Circuit decision upholding dismissal of their RICO conspiracy claims against FIA (Grant v. FIA Card Services, March 28, 2013, Dkt. 12-1189).

At issue is an unpublished November 27, 2012, decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals in Philadelphia, affirming a federal district court decision that the travel club membership purchasers had not adequately pled their RICO conspiracy claims against FIA. The appellate court held that the purchasers had failed to allege that FIA "agreed to commit the predicate acts of mail and wire fraud."

In their petition for review, the purchasers present the question: "Whether conspiracy claims brought under 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d) of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act ("RICO"), against a bank or credit card company charged with providing funding intended to facilitate an ongoing scheme of fraud in violation of subsection (c) of the Act, are subject to dismissal solely because they fail to allege that the funding company agreed to commit the predicate acts of the RICO scheme."

The purchasers claim that the appellate court’s decision conflicts with the Supreme Court’s holding in Salinas v. United States, 522 U.S. 52 (1997), and with the District of Columbia Circuit’s decision in RSM Production Corp. v. Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer US, LLP, 682 F.3d 1043 (D.C. Cir. 2012), creating a split between the circuit courts.

Attorneys: Gary Martin Meyers for Brian Grant.

Companies: FIA Card Services

News: RICO