Torts Keyed to Dobbs
Torts Keyed to Epstein
Torts Keyed to Prosser
Development Of Liability
Intentional Interference With Person Or Property
Causation In Fact
Proximate Or Legal Cause
Joint Tortfeasors
Owners And Occupiers Of Land
Wrongful Death And Survival
Strict Liability
Misuse Of Legal Procedure
Interference With Advantageous Relationships
Torts In The Age Of Statutes
Burnette v. Wahl 284 Or. 705, 588 P.2d 1105 (1978)
Nearing v. Weaver 295 Or. 702, 670 P.2d 137 (1983)
Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics 403 U.S. 388, 91 S. Ct. 1999, 29 L. Ed. 2d 619 (1971)
Transamerica Mortgage Advisors, Inc. (TAMA) v. Lewis 444 U.S. 11, 100 S. Ct. 242, 62 L. Ed. 2d 146 (1979)
Reves v. Ernst & Young 507 U.S. 170, 113 S. Ct. 1163, 122 L. Ed. 2d 525 (1993)
New York Central Railroad Company v. Winfield 244 U.S. 147, 37 S. Ct. 546, 61 L. Ed. 1045 (1917)
English v. General Electric Company 496 U.S. 72, 110 S. Ct. 2270, 110 L. Ed. 2d 65, 14 OSHC 1609, 5 IER Cases 609 (1990)
Ramirez v. Plough, Inc
Bower v. Westinghouse Corp 206 W. Va. 133, 522 S.E.2d 424, 49 ERC 1587 (1999)
Williams v. Wilson 972 S.W.2d 260 (Ky. 1998)
Pulliam v. Coastal Emergency Svcs 257 Va. 1, 509 S.E.2d 307 (1999)
Alexander v. Sandoval 532 U.S. 275, 121 S. Ct. 1511, 149 L. Ed. 2d 517 (2001)
De Falco v. Bernas 244 F.3d 286 (2d Cir. 2001)
Clarke v. Oregon Health Sciences University 343 Or. 581, 175 P.3d 418 (2007) [2007 BL 180776]
Compensation Systems as Substitutes for Tort Law
Torts Keyed to Franklin
Torts Keyed to Henderson
Torts Keyed to Farnesworth
Torts Keyed to Vetri
Torts keyed to Robertson
Torts keyed to Best
Torts Keyed to Goldberg
Torts Keyed to Boyce
Torts Keyed to Twerski
Torts Keyed to Diamond
Torts Keyed to Underwood
Torts > Torts Keyed to Prosser > Torts In The Age Of Statutes
Reves v. Ernst & Young
Citation. Reves v. Ernst & Young, 507 U.S. 170, 113 S. Ct. 1163, 122 L. Ed. 2d 525, 61 U.S.L.W. 4207, Fed. Sec. L. Rep. (CCH) P97,357, 93 Cal. Daily Op. Service 1494, 93 Daily Journal DAR 2750, 7 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 41 (U.S. Mar. 3, 1993)
CitationReves v. Ernst & Young, 507 U.S. 170, 113 S. Ct. 1163, 122 L. Ed. 2d 525, 1993 U.S. LEXIS 1940, 61 U.S.L.W. 4207, Fed. Sec. L. Rep. (CCH) P97,357, 93 Cal. Daily Op. Service 1494, 93 Daily Journal DAR 2750, 7 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 41 (U.S. Mar. 3, 1993)
Brief Fact Summary. An organized crime control statute's provision required clarification regarding whether nonparticipation in an organized crime could protect one from liability.
Synopsis of Rule of Law. To conduct or participate, directly or indirectly, in the conduct of an enterprise or affairs falling under Rackateer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) one must participate in the operation or management of the enterprise itself.
Participation in the conduct of the enterprise requires proof that the defendant participated in the operation or management of the enterprise.
Facts. The RICO chapter of the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970 was designed to control organized crime or criminal acts. A conflict in cases regarding RICO's operation and management provision prompted this Court to grant certiorari. The district court ruled in favor of the Defendants. The court of appeals affirmed the judgment of the district court, but reversed the damage award and remanded for a new trial.
Issue. Whether one must participate in the operation or management of an enterprise to be liable under the RICO?
Held. (Justice Blackmun). Yes. One must participate in the operation or management of an enterprise to be liable under RICO. The legislative history confirms what is provided for by the Act, that one is not liable under that provision unless one has participated in the operation or management of the enterprise itself. The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed.
Discussion. The court in this case determines that RICO does not allow actions against one not in operation or management of the enterprise because the legislature wanted the statute to apply to fewer cases.
Study Assets: Damages