The Court held that racketeering activity to avoid paying a U.S. judgment confirming a foreign arbitration award against a U.S. resident constituted a domestic injury for purposes of RICO's private right of action, even though the judgment creditor lives in Russia and both parties are Russian nationals. The Court declined to state a bright-line rule for locating injuries to intangible property, instead emphasizing the need for a "contextual approach."

Recent Posts

Fourth Circuit Applies Recent Supreme Court Decision on RICO Injuries

In Percival Partners Ltd. v. Nduom, the Fourth Circuit (Judge Harris, joined by Judge Thacker and Judge Richardson) applied last Term’s decision in Yegiazaryan v. Smagin (2023) to conclude that the plaintiffs’ alleged RICO injury was impermissibly extraterritorial. In an analysis that embraced Yegiazaryan’s contextual approach to siting RICO injuries, the Fourth Circuit held that…

Continue Reading

Supreme Court Denies Cert in Extraterritorial Wire Fraud Case

The Supreme Court denied cert this morning in Elbaz v. United States, a case involving the extraterritorial reach of the federal wire fraud statute. The order lets stand a decision of the Fourth Circuit holding that the wire fraud statute could be applied to a scheme to defraud investors centered in Israel based on two…

Continue Reading

Ninth Circuit Applies New Supreme Court Interpretation of RICO’s Geographic Scope

On August 11, 2023, the Ninth Circuit became the first lower court to apply the new test for “domestic injury” under RICO that the Supreme Court announced in Yegiazaryan v. Smagin (2023). In Global Master International Group, Inc. v. Esmond Natural, Inc., the Ninth Circuit held that a Chinese company stated a valid civil RICO…

Continue Reading