European Community v. RJR Nabisco, Inc.
764 F.3d 149
2d Cir.2014Background
- RJR challenges RICO’s reach, arguing §1964(c) requires a domestic injury regardless of predicate conduct; court rejects this.
- Plaintiffs allege injuries from a pattern of racketeering connected to §1962 predicates, some abroad; court considers extraterritorial application.
- Court discusses Sedima and Anza to define the compensable injury as the harm caused by predicate acts that constitute a pattern.
- Norex Petroleum is cited as limiting to private causes of action and not deciding domestic injury under §1964(c); court rejects implication of a domestic-injury requirement.
- Court endorses extraterritorial application where predicate statutes apply extraterritorially and injury abroad is proximately caused by those violations; panel rehearing denied.
- Court notes domestic investment pleadings under §1962(a) and maintains no need to plead domestic injury for those claims
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does §1964(c) require a domestic injury? | RJR argues injury must be domestic. | RJR contends domestic-injury requirement controls. | No, no domestic-injury requirement. |
| Can injury abroad be compensable under §1964(c) when predicate acts occur abroad? | Plaintiffs rely on extraterritorial reach of predicate acts. | Defendant asserts injury must be domestic. | Yes; injury need not be domestic if predicate statute applies extraterritorially. |
| How do Sedima and related precedents guide the injury prong for §1964(c)? | Injury tracks the pattern of racketeering. | Injury must align with domestic expectations. | Injury focuses on harm caused by a pattern of predicate acts, not necessarily domestic injury. |
Key Cases Cited
- Sedima, S.P.R.L. v. Imrex Co., 473 U.S. 479 (1985) (injury must be caused by a pattern of racketeering)
- Holmes v. Secs. Investor Prot. Corp., 503 U.S. 258 (1992) (interpretation of RICO injury scope)
- Anza v. Ideal Steel Supply Corp., 547 U.S. 451 (2006) (injury requirement tied to predicate acts)
- Norex Petroleum Ltd. v. Access Industries, Inc., 631 F.3d 29 (2d Cir.2010) (per curiam; related to private causes of action under §1964(c))
- Morrison v. Nat’l Australia Bank Ltd., 561 U.S. 247 (2010) (extraterritoriality affects what conduct statutes reach)
- Ouaknine v. MacFarlane, 897 F.2d 75 (2d Cir.1990) (distinguishes investment-related injury under Sedima)