If RICO is such a broad statute, why are RICO criminal cases so rare? Why don the government prosecutors use the RICO Act as much as the civil plaintiff attorneys?
In civil litigation, RICO is a rare tool that enables a civil plaintiff to recover not only his or her actual damages, but three times the actual damages (as a penalty) plus the plaintiff’s costs and attorneys’ fees. Very few statutes (state or federal) allow a civil plaintiff such an enormous windfall if they are successful. Accordingly, there is a huge incentive for a civil plaintiff’s attorney to try to construct a civil RICO claim in every action that the attorney may bring. Although RICO is a cumbersome statute, pleading a RICO claim has value to civil plaintiff’s attorneys. Even though a civil plaintiff’s attorney believes the claim may be dismissed (voluntarily or involuntarily) before trial, the RICO claim has substantial settlement value for so long as the defendant potentially faces liability under the RICO act.
Related Questions
- If RICO is such a broad statute, why are RICO criminal cases so rare? Why don the government prosecutors use the RICO Act as much as the civil plaintiff attorneys?
- Is there any difference between how civil cases and criminal cases are handled on appeal?
- What is the statute of limitations for a criminal act?
