AND · 18usc1962:pattern.relatedness
Under H.J. Inc., predicate acts are related if they have the same or similar purposes, results, participants, victims, or methods of commission, or are interrelated by distinguishing characteristics and are not isolated events; in criminal enterprise cases (Weisman), vertical relatedness to the enterprise's affairs also links disparate predicates.
Exact element source
a pattern of racketeering activitySource:
docroot/ir/usc/title18.jsonl#title18_sec1962; Unicode character offsets [135:169] (end exclusive); SHA-256 6caae47f43b5ab0899b660616e298363bd36f9f540d915c2be11eb7126f5e27d.All variants
| Variant | Description | Merits instance blocks | Distinct cases | Example cases (up to 3 per group) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| relatedness/same-perpetrator-victims-goal-and-methods | 0 Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 1 | 0 | No counted merits examples Excluded context examples: /f2d/624/1118-01 — United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1980 — applied/alternative | |
| relatedness/single-scheme-against-one-victim | 1 Satisfied 1; not satisfied 0; excluded context 0 | 1 | /f2d/976/1016-01 — United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1992 — satisfied | |
| relatedness/supplied-by-common-enterprise | 0 Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 1 | 0 | No counted merits examples Excluded context examples: /f2d/624/1118-01 — United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1980 — rule-announced/merits |
How courts decided this element
| Case | Element | Holding and scope | Variant | Exact source quotations |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| /f2d/624/1118-01 — United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1980 | Relatedness of predicate acts (horizontal and vertical relatedness) | not_reached Excluded from merits counts rule-announced / merits claim: (c); party: Weisman; subject: party=Weisman Pre-H.J. Inc. rule: no act-to-act relatedness is required; each act need only relate to the enterprise's affairs and fall within ten years. Decided as review of the jury charge (refusal to give the defendant's relatedness instruction upheld): a proposed sub-requirement is rejected, not found satisfied. | relatedness/supplied-by-common-enterprise | The Theatre, from its inception until its collapse, was operated through a wide ranging pattern of fraud.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f2d_624.jsonl#/f2d/624/1118-01; Unicode character offsets [1892:1997] (end exclusive); SHA-256 9f02652be952ebf06fe5bc7850efdd6237ac4cd8110d7ce9690b75ad54eaa6ed.the statutory language does not expressly require that the predicate acts of racketeering be specifically “related” to each other and we find no affirmative evidence in the legislative history from which we should infer such a requirementSource: docroot/ir/caselaw/f2d_624.jsonl#/f2d/624/1118-01; Unicode character offsets [9856:10094] (end exclusive); SHA-256 9f02652be952ebf06fe5bc7850efdd6237ac4cd8110d7ce9690b75ad54eaa6ed.Thus, the enterprise itself supplies a significant unifying link between the various predicate acts specified in section 1961(1) that may constitute a “pattern of racketeering activity.”Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f2d_624.jsonl#/f2d/624/1118-01; Unicode character offsets [10752:10938] (end exclusive); SHA-256 9f02652be952ebf06fe5bc7850efdd6237ac4cd8110d7ce9690b75ad54eaa6ed.Accordingly, we find no error in the court’s refusal to adopt Weisman’s extended definition of “pattern” in charging the jury.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f2d_624.jsonl#/f2d/624/1118-01; Unicode character offsets [12851:12977] (end exclusive); SHA-256 9f02652be952ebf06fe5bc7850efdd6237ac4cd8110d7ce9690b75ad54eaa6ed. |
| /f2d/624/1118-01 — United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1980 | Relatedness of predicate acts (horizontal and vertical relatedness) | satisfied Excluded from merits counts applied / alternative basis: proved; claim: (c); party: Weisman; theory: act-to-act relatedness, if it were required; subject: party=Weisman; theory=act-to-act relatedness, if it were required Footnote alternative: even under an act-to-act test the 1973 stock fraud and 1976-77 bankruptcy fraud were related (same perpetrator, victims, goal, methods). [proved]: on the trial evidence no jury could have found the acts unrelated. | relatedness/same-perpetrator-victims-goal-and-methods | Weisman was a perpetrator of all of the acts of fraud and all were undertaken during the conduct of the Theatre’s affairs.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f2d_624.jsonl#/f2d/624/1118-01; Unicode character offsets [50090:50212] (end exclusive); SHA-256 9f02652be952ebf06fe5bc7850efdd6237ac4cd8110d7ce9690b75ad54eaa6ed.Furthermore, the acts of stock fraud harmed legitimate investors in the Theatre and many of these same investors were again harmed when the later acts of bankruptcy fraud prevented the Theatre’s financial rehabilitation.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f2d_624.jsonl#/f2d/624/1118-01; Unicode character offsets [50213:50433] (end exclusive); SHA-256 9f02652be952ebf06fe5bc7850efdd6237ac4cd8110d7ce9690b75ad54eaa6ed.In light of the numerous similarities between the predicate acts of racketeering, we find appellant’s contention that a jury could find that the acts of racketeering activity he engaged in were sporadic and unrelated to be completely untenable.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f2d_624.jsonl#/f2d/624/1118-01; Unicode character offsets [50743:50987] (end exclusive); SHA-256 9f02652be952ebf06fe5bc7850efdd6237ac4cd8110d7ce9690b75ad54eaa6ed. |
| /f2d/976/1016-01 — United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1992 | Relatedness of predicate acts (horizontal and vertical relatedness) | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: conceded; claim: (c),(d) | relatedness/single-scheme-against-one-victim | We limit our discussion to the continuity prong of this test because all parties agree that the relationship prong is satisfied here.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f2d_976.jsonl#/f2d/976/1016-01; Unicode character offsets [19389:19522] (end exclusive); SHA-256 ebc98ea70879c4cb40e7f64b87cbfd47e72732fe1a73dbca8733e49576748b79. |
Court interpretations
interpretation
the statutory language does not expressly require that the predicate acts of racketeering be specifically “related” to each other and we find no affirmative evidence in the legislative history from which we should infer such a requirement
/f2d/624/1118-01 — United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1980
the statutory language does not expressly require that the predicate acts of racketeering be specifically “related” to each other and we find no affirmative evidence in the legislative history from which we should infer such a requirementSource:
docroot/ir/caselaw/f2d_624.jsonl#/f2d/624/1118-01; Unicode character offsets [9856:10094] (end exclusive); SHA-256 9f02652be952ebf06fe5bc7850efdd6237ac4cd8110d7ce9690b75ad54eaa6ed.Under H.J. Inc., predicate acts are related if they have the same or similar purposes, results, participants, victims, or methods of commission, or are interrelated by distinguishing characteristics and are not isolated events; in criminal enterprise cases (Weisman), vertical relatedness to the enterprise's affairs also links disparate predicates.
interpretation
Thus, the enterprise itself supplies a significant unifying link between the various predicate acts specified in section 1961(1) that may constitute a “pattern of racketeering activity.”
/f2d/624/1118-01 — United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1980
Thus, the enterprise itself supplies a significant unifying link between the various predicate acts specified in section 1961(1) that may constitute a “pattern of racketeering activity.”Source:
docroot/ir/caselaw/f2d_624.jsonl#/f2d/624/1118-01; Unicode character offsets [10752:10938] (end exclusive); SHA-256 9f02652be952ebf06fe5bc7850efdd6237ac4cd8110d7ce9690b75ad54eaa6ed.Under H.J. Inc., predicate acts are related if they have the same or similar purposes, results, participants, victims, or methods of commission, or are interrelated by distinguishing characteristics and are not isolated events; in criminal enterprise cases (Weisman), vertical relatedness to the enterprise's affairs also links disparate predicates.