Legal Opinion
Diaz v. Parks
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided August 16, 2005No. 02-56818PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM Opinion; Concurrence by Judge REINHARDT; Concurrence by Judge KLEINFELD; Concurrence by Judge BERZON; Dissent by Judge GOULD.
2Per curiam
We examine whether a false imprisonment that caused the victim to lose employment and employment opportunities is an injury to “business or property” within the meaning of RICO.
Facts
Diaz claims to be a victim of the Los Angeles Police Department’s infamous Rampart scandal. He sued over two hundred people connected with the Los Ange-les Police Department (LAPD) or Los Angeles city government under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO),…
3Cases cited16 opinions
- Sedima, S. P. R. L. v. Imrex Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Singleton v. WulffSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Palsgraf v. Long Island R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Holmes v. Securities Investor Protection CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Ruth E. Oscar Charles Spinosa v. University Students Co-Operative Association George ProperCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by1 opinion
- Diaz v. GatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005