Beck v. Prupis, 529 U.S. 494, 19 (2000)

Page:   Index   Previous  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19

512

BECK v. PRUPIS

Stevens, J., dissenting

only qualifying "tortious act" must be "an act that is independently wrongful under RICO." Ante, at 505-506 (emphasis added).

And if one assumes further that the Court is correct to say that the only qualifying " 'ac[t] of a tortious character' " is "an act that is independently wrongful under RICO," the analogy does not actually support what the Court has held. The majority holds that § 1964(c) liability could be imposed if the overt acts injuring the plaintiff are among those racketeering activities listed in § 1961(1)—such as murder, bribery, arson, and extortion. Racketeering activities, however, are not "independently wrongful under RICO." They are, of course, independently wrongful under other provisions of state and federal criminal law, but RICO does not make racketeering activity itself wrongful under the Act. The only acts that are "independently wrongful under RICO" are violations of the provisions of § 1962. Thus, even accepting the Court's own analogy, if petitioner were harmed by predicate acts defined in § 1961(1), that still would not, by itself, give rise to a cause of action under § 1964(c). Only if those racketeering activities also constituted a violation of § 1962(a), (b), or (c) would petitioner be harmed by "an act that is independently wrongful under RICO." And, of course, if petitioner were already harmed by conduct covered by one of those provisions, he would hardly need to use § 1962(d)'s conspiracy provision to establish a cause of action.

* * *

The plain language of RICO makes it clear that petition-er's civil cause of action under § 1964(c) for a violation of § 1962(d) does not require that he be injured in his business or property by any particular kind of overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy. The Court's recitation of the common law of civil conspiracy does not prove otherwise, and, indeed, contradicts its own holding.

For these reasons, I respectfully dissent.

Page:   Index   Previous  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19

Last modified: October 4, 2007