Originally designed to combat traditional organized crime, the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) has evolved significantly since its enactment in 1970. While the statute was intended to target the Mafia and other criminal syndicates, the broad language of Civil RICO has made it applicable to a wide array of legal contexts, including business disputes, corporate fraud, and political corruption. This article will explore how Civil RICO has expanded beyond its initial scope and the implications of this shift for businesses, individuals, and the legal system.

The Original Purpose of RICO

The U.S. Congress passed the RICO Act as part of the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970. Its primary goal was to dismantle criminal organizations by attacking their financial and organizational structures. RICO allowed federal prosecutors to charge individuals involved in racketeering activities as part of an “enterprise,” giving them the power to target entire criminal organizations, rather than just individuals committing isolated crimes.

The statute provides for both criminal penalties and civil remedies. Under Civil RICO, private plaintiffs can sue individuals or entities who have engaged in a “pattern of racketeering” if they have suffered injury to their business or property. The possibility of recovering treble damages and attorney’s fees has made Civil RICO an attractive option for plaintiffs.

Expansion into White-Collar and Corporate Crime

Over time, Civil RICO has been increasingly applied to non-traditional criminal contexts, particularly in the realm of white-collar crime. Courts have allowed the use of Civil RICO to address financial fraud, securities violations, and corporate malfeasance. The broad list of predicate acts under RICO—which includes offenses like mail and wire fraud, embezzlement, and bribery—has provided the legal basis for applying RICO to business-related disputes.

For instance, Civil RICO has been used to pursue corporate officers who engage in fraudulent schemes that harm investors or other businesses. In cases where fraudulent activity involves repeated actions, such as multiple instances of misleading investors or falsifying reports, plaintiffs can allege a pattern of racketeering activity under RICO.

One notable case illustrating this expansion is Bridge v. Phoenix Bond & Indemnity Co. (2008), where the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a plaintiff does not need to have directly relied on fraudulent misrepresentations to pursue a Civil RICO claim based on mail fraud. This ruling has broadened the applicability of Civil RICO to cases where fraud affects a broader set of victims.

Concerns About Overreach

The growing use of Civil RICO in business disputes has sparked debates about whether the statute is being over-applied. Critics argue that RICO was never intended to be used in civil lawsuits involving routine business disputes or non-criminal activities. The potential for treble damages and attorney’s fees can create a powerful incentive for plaintiffs to frame their disputes as RICO claims, even when the underlying conduct does not involve true criminal racketeering.

Defendants in Civil RICO cases often challenge the use of the statute, arguing that the plaintiffs have failed to establish a legitimate “enterprise” or a true “pattern” of racketeering activity. Courts are generally cautious in their application of RICO, particularly in civil cases, but the statute’s broad language leaves room for creative arguments.

The Future of Civil RICO in Business Litigation

Despite concerns about overreach, Civil RICO continues to be a popular legal tool for plaintiffs seeking to address complex, fraudulent schemes that may involve multiple actors and long-term misconduct. As businesses become more global and interconnected, Civil RICO’s ability to target organizations and enterprises remains relevant. However, its expansion into areas beyond traditional organized crime raises important questions about the boundaries of the statute.

As courts continue to grapple with the application of RICO in non-criminal contexts, there may be future efforts to reform the statute or limit its use in civil cases. For now, Civil RICO remains a powerful tool in the legal arsenal of plaintiffs seeking redress for serious and ongoing harm caused by fraudulent enterprises.

Next Steps for Businesses

If you have an issue related to civil litigation that may involve Civil RICO or any other issues involving complex legal matters, contact Possinger Law Group.

= = = = =

About Possinger Law Group, PLLC

Founded in 2001, Possinger Law Group is a boutique law firm dedicated to elite levels of service to small and medium-sized businesses and the individuals that own them. When faced with serious problems, clients have reached out to Possinger Law Group to be a trusted advisor and advocate to be a guide through high conflict situations and complex legal challenges. In litigation matters, Possinger Law Group works with its clients to effectively resolve disputes, and when necessary, by being fiercely aggressive in litigation.

Editor’s Note: This blog post, as well as any data and information provided are for informational purposes only. and is not intended to constitute legal advice and may not constitute the most up-to-date legal or other information. Readers of this article should contact their attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular legal matter. No reader, user, or browser of this site should act or refrain from acting based on information on this article without first seeking legal advice from counsel in the relevant jurisdiction.