Historic RICO ruling against Cook County Board of Review
Lawyer News
The Federal Court of the Seventh Circuit sustained both civil RICO and Honest Services charges in the suit against Cook County Board of Review Commissioners Larry Rogers Jr., Joseph Berrios and Brendan Houlihan, along with members of their senior staffs. The ruling is significant because the RICO (Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organization) Act is rarely successfully pled in a civil lawsuit. This case maybe the first time since the U.S. Supreme Court decision narrowing its scope, that the charge of denial of Honest Services has been successfully pled. The benchmark case, Santana v Board of Review, now proceeds to discovery and trial.
"We were heartened by the Court's ruling sustaining these charges,' R. Tamara de Silva, attorney for the Plaintiff stated, 'we understood that pleading both RICO and Honest Services would be challenging, but believed the facts, in this case, warranted the charges. We were very pleased with the Court's ruling."
"It should never be easy to bring charges, such as these, against a government entity like the Board of Review,' de Silva continued, 'but neither should a government entity by allowed to trample on the constitutional rights of a private businessman nor engage in a pattern of activities, anticipated by Honest Services and the RICO Act, with impunity. We believe the Court's ruling substantially advances the evolution and interpretation of both these landmark legal questions."
"My client looks forward to his case moving to discovery and trial,' de Silva said, 'we will be no less vigilant, focused and relentless in revealing the actions, motivations and consequences of the Defendants, and those that participated in the 'continuing enterprise'.
Related listings
-
After 30 Years, Solo Moves Practice From Barn to Big Law
Lawyer News 11/06/2010Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney has added to its white-collar defense practice through the addition of a 40-year veteran with experience representing the likes of John E. du Pont and former congressman Edward M. Mezvinsky. Tom Bergstrom was scheduled...
-
The Law Firm of Levi & Korsinsky, LLP Launches an Investigation
Lawyer News 11/06/2010Levi & Korsinsky is investigating the Board of Directors of Fushi Copperweld, Inc. ("Fushi" or the "Company") (NasdaqGS: FSIN | PowerRating) for possible breaches of fiduciary duty and other violations of state law in connection with the receipt ...
-
Florida foreclosure law firm lays off hundreds
Lawyer News 11/06/2010A Florida law firm once used by mortgage finance giants Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae and now under investigation for its handling of foreclosure cases has laid off hundreds of employees, a lawyer for the firm's owner said on Thursday. The Florida attor...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.