·
Case and law context
Interpretation-only case: no CASE context or instance blocks recorded in this snapshot.
Instances and excluded annotation blocks
| Case | Element | Holding and scope | Variant | Exact source quotations |
|---|
Court interpretations recorded from this case
interpretation
"The Supreme Court requires plaintiffs to establish both but for cause and proximate cause in order to show injury 'by reason of' a RICO violation.
"The Supreme Court requires plaintiffs to establish both but for cause and proximate cause in order to show injury 'by reason of' a RICO violation.Source:
docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_920.jsonl#/f3d/920/0958-01; Unicode character offsets [11394:11541] (end exclusive); SHA-256 43e4170249e2a24056cca48e31088f46875c9dc4419d09a210a34c125ef9232e.Under Holmes v. SIPC (503 U.S. 258 (1992)), Anza, and Hemi Group, proximate cause requires "some direct relation between the injury asserted and the injurious conduct alleged".