- 5 - Plaintiffs' economic advantage. All of the factual allegations revolved around the Defendants' wrongdoing in violations of the above-mentioned laws. There were no factual allegations regarding any personal injury. The Plaintiffs based their claims on four counts consisting of two separate counts for RICO Act violations, one count for unlawful interference with prospective economic advantage, and one count for punitive damages. As required by the RICO Act, the two counts for RICO Act violations alleged injury to the Plaintiffs' business and property. Under the count for unlawful interference with prospective economic advantage, the Plaintiffs alleged that the Defendants' actions interfered with the rights of the Plaintiffs to "enjoy the fruits and advantages of their industries and efforts as employees". (Emphasis added.)3 Finally, by their count for punitive damages, the Plaintiffs claimed that the Defendants' negligent conduct caused "severe economic and financial harm as well as other damages" to the Plaintiffs. No mention was made of any physical or emotional injury under any of the four counts. Pursuant to the class action, all AHP employees affected by AHP's relocation to Guayama, Puerto Rico, received a legal notice of class action. Petitioner was a member of this class action 3 Not relevant here, the class action also alleged interference with the Union's right to receive dues income from its members.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011