New York Attorneys JHA handles range the gamut of complex financial and commercial litigation and arbitration, including securities, RICO, corporate and contract disputes, credit default swaps, derivatives, and class, mass, and derivative actions. The firm also represents law firms in major disputes.

Commercial Litigation and Arbitration

New York Attorneys JHA handles range the gamut of complex financial and commercial litigation and arbitration, including securities, RICO, corporate and contract disputes, credit default swaps, derivatives, and class, mass, and derivative actions. The firm also represents law firms in major disputes.
Commercial Litigation and Arbitration
« Back to Complex Lit Blog

RICO — Corporation + Subsidiaries + Respective Officers/Employees ≠ Enterprise

Download PDF

From Cardinal Health Solutions, Inc. v. Valley Baptist Med. Ctr., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3909 (S.D. Tex. Jan. 21, 2009)):

Defendants allege that "Cardinal Health, Inc., Cardinal Health Solutions, Inc., Cardinal Health 101, Inc., Cardinal Health 109, Inc., Cardinal Health 303, Inc., Cardinal Distribution and their officers, agents and employees (the 'Enterprise'), acted as a group of persons associated together in fact for the common purpose of carrying out [their] fraudulent scheme . . . ." ...

***

Valley Baptist has provided no evidence that Cardinal Health, Inc., "principally a holding company that owns stock of its subsidiaries who are involved in various aspects of the healthcare industry," formed an ongoing association with Cardinal Health, 109, Inc. for the purposes of mailing the allegedly fraudulent invoices. *** The closest Defendants come to providing evidence of such an association is to make the conclusory assertion that because many of the same individuals serve as officers of various Cardinal Health entities, including Cardinal Health 109, Inc., this "demonstrate[s] that a function of these subsidiaries is to facilitate or conceal the fraud of Cardinal Health, Inc. since the same individuals who control Cardinal Health, Inc. have also controlled Cardinal Health, 109, Inc. and other Cardinal entities. This is also evidence that Cardinal Health, Inc. conducted or participated in the conduct of the enterprise's affairs." ...

The factual similarities between this case and Atkinson [v. Anadarko Bank and Trust Co., 808 F.2d 438, 440 (5th Cir. 1987)] are striking. In both cases, RICO violations are alleged based on the mailing of false statements (or invoices) requesting payment in excess of an agreed amount. In both cases, the mailing of the statements or invoices is an activity of the subsidiary of a holding company, and in both cases there is no evidence presented that the holding company and its subsidiary "functioned as a continuing unit or formed an ongoing association" for the purposes of committing the predicate acts.

***Despite months of discovery, Defendants have provided nothing more than the bald assertion that since some of the same individuals serve as officers of both Cardinal Health, Inc. and Cardinal Health 109, Inc., Cardinal Health, Inc. must be participating in the submission of the allegedly fraudulent invoices. This is insufficient. Reasonable jurors could not find the existence of an association-in-fact enterprise separate and apart from the activities of Cardinal Health, 109, Inc., and so Defendants fail to meet an essential element of their RICO claim. Accordingly, Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment on the RICO claim is GRANTED.

Share this article:

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Email

Recent Posts

RICO: Indirect Injury Unrecoverable — Indirect Purchaser Rule Imported from Antitrust

Rule 11 Sanctions: (1) Improper Purpose of Harassment Reasonably Determined Based on Past Tactics (25 Lawsuits, 14 Ethics Complaints, and 150 FOIA Requests) As Well As Present Behavior — (2) Hearings Are Not Only Not Required to Satisfy Due Process But, If The Record Is Otherwise Adequate, Are Affirmatively Discouraged

RICO and Probate Exception to Federal Jurisdiction: Federal Jurisdiction over RICO Claim Not Barred by Probate Exception Even If the Federal Judgment May Be Binding on the Probate Proceedings (Or Vice Versa) — Calculating Damages Based on Diminution of Value of Estate ≠ Administration of the Estate — Doesn’t Matter If RICO Misconduct Includes Defendants’ Actions with Respect to The Estate

RICO: No Causation Where Harm Flowed Several Steps After the Fraudulent Acts — RICO Causation Same As Antitrust Causation

Sanctions vs. Automatic Stay: Imposition of Sanctions (Here, Inherent Power Sanctions) Is Subject to the Police Power Exception to the Automatic Stay in Bankruptcy

The Word “Include” May Be A Word of Limitation As Opposed to a Word of Enlargement, Depending on the Context

RICO — Pleading Conspiracy — Plaintiffs Must Plausibly Allege That the Defendants Knowingly Joined the RICO Conspiracy — Sparse Allegations of Knowledge of Fraud Due to Participation in a Commercial Transaction Insufficient to State RICO Conspiracy Claim Where Allegations Not Inconsistent with Ordinary Commercial Behavior — While Knowledge May Be Pled “Generally” under Rule 9(b), It Cannot Be Alleged Conclusorily and Must Satisfy the Twiqbal Plausibility Standard

Depositions: Improper to Object to Form to Straightforward Questions (Not Compound, Vague, Leading or Speculative) — Lack of Foundation Objection Improper in 30(b)(6) Deposition — Improper to “Educate” Witness During Breaks of 30(b)(6) Deposition Through Witness Calls to Knowledgeable Corporate Colleagues — Magistrate Judge May Impose Financial Sanctions

Spoliation/Sanctions: “A Party Does Not Spoliate Evidence When, Without Notice Of The Evidence’s Potential Relevance, It Destroys The Evidence According To Its Policy Or In The Normal Course Of Its Business” (Good Quote)

RICO: Fraud on Government Entities Causing Plaintiffs to Pay More for Inmate Calls Actionable on Bridge v. Phoenix Bond Analysis — Fact That Governments Had Separate Injuries As Part of the Scheme (from Reduced Commissions) Irrelevant — Plaintiffs’ Injuries Not Derivative of Governments’ — The Fraud on the Governments Was Not Too Distinct From Plaintiffs’ Injuries But Rather Necessary to Injure Plaintiffs — No Risk of Duplicative Recoveries and No Plaintiff Better Situated to Sue for Plaintiffs’ Injuries

Archives
New York Attorneys JHA handles range the gamut of complex financial and commercial litigation and arbitration, including securities, RICO, corporate and contract disputes, credit default swaps, derivatives, and class, mass, and derivative actions. The firm also represents law firms in major disputes.
New York Attorneys JHA handles range the gamut of complex financial and commercial litigation and arbitration, including securities, RICO, corporate and contract disputes, credit default swaps, derivatives, and class, mass, and derivative actions. The firm also represents law firms in major disputes.

New York Office

© 2024 Joseph Hage Aaronson LLC  
Disclaimer | Attorney Advertising Notice | Legal Notice