Antitrust Law Daily Wrap Up, RICO—W.D. Wash.: ‘Wronged’ attorney fails to craft racketeering claim against municipalities, (Apr 4, 2016)

By Greg Hammond, J.D.

A supposedly “wronged” attorney has failed to state sufficient Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) claims against various municipalities in the State of Washington. The federal district court in Seattle dismissed with prejudice the attorney’s RICO claims, finding that she failed to identify a predicate act or RICO enterprise (Block v. Washington State Bar Association, March 31, 2016, Martinez, R.).

The attorney, who proceeded pro se, filed suit against the City of Gold Bar, Snohomish County, the City of Duvall, municipal law firm Kenyon Disend PLLC, and various individuals, alleging a number of claims, including violations of the RICO and Sherman Acts. In particular, she alleged a multi-agency conspiracy to retaliate against her for exercising her constitutional rights and claimed that this conspiracy amounted to the operation of a RICO enterprise. Similar claims were previously filed in two separate actions, but were dismissed. The plaintiff also was previously sanctioned for bringing “frivolous” Sherman Act and RICO claims against the defendants. Gold Bar, Snohomish County, Duvall, and Keyon Disend—as well as various employees and officials—moved to dismiss the attorney’s amended complaint.

The court first dismissed the claims against the Gold Bar defendants as time-barred, as barred under the doctrine of res judicata, and for failing to allege sufficient facts to support a RICO claim, noting that the plaintiff failed to respond to the Gold Bar defendants’ motion to dismiss.

Next, the court found that a portion of the RICO and antitrust claims against the remaining defendants were both time-barred and barred by the doctrine of res judicata. In particular, the court found that various claims in the instant action shared an identity with the previously dismissed RICO and antitrust claims, as well as an identity or privity between parties, and were subject to a final judgment on the merits.

Insufficient pleading. With regard to the remaining RICO claims, the court concluded that the plaintiff failed to plausibly plead a predicate act. Although the plaintiff claimed that the defendants engaged in extortion, she failed to identify that any defendant obtained anything of value from the plaintiff by use of force or threat of use of force. In addition, the court found that the plaintiff did not identify the alleged “RICO enterprise,” or a pattern of racketeering activity with the threat of continuing activity.

The court also stated, without going into any detail, that the attorney failed to plead any facts supporting a Sherman Act violation against the various defendants.

The case is No. C15-2018RSM.

Attorneys: Mikolaj T. Tempski, Snohomish County Prosecuting Attorney, for Snohomish County. Thomas P. Miller (Christie Law Group PLLC) for City of Duvall. Shannon M. Ragonesi (Keating, Bucklin & McCormack, Inc.) for Linda Loen. Michael R. Kenyon for Kenyon Disend.

Companies: Kenyon Disend PLLC

Cases: Antitrust RICO WashingtonNews