Legal Opinion
Parnes v. Heinold Commodities, Inc.
District Court, N.D. Illinois
Decided April 20, 1982No. 79 C 4047PublishedCited by 56 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
SHADUR, District Judge.
Albert Parnés (“Parnés”) and his sister Rosalyn Christensen (“Christensen”) sued Heinold Commodities, Inc. (“Heinold”) in five counts, all arising out of an alleged scheme by Heinold (through two of its agents) to defraud plaintiffs. Before trial Heinold moved for judgment on the pleadings as to Count V of the Second Amended Complaint (“Complaint”), grounded on the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act (“RICO” 1 ), 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-68 (all citations to Title 18 in this opinion will read simply “Section — ”). For the reasons…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- United States v. TurketteSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Jacobellis v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Cenco Inc. v. Seidman & SeidmanCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1982
- United States v. Harry Aleman and Leonard ForestaCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1979
- United States v. Andrew GeorgeCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1973
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by56 opinions
- Haroco, Inc. v. American National Bank and Trust Company of Chicago, Walter E. Heller International Corporation, & Ronald J. GrayheckCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1985
- Liquid Air Corp. v. RogersCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1987
- Northern Trust Bank/O'hare, N.A. v. Inryco, Inc.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1985
- Rebecca J. Schofield v. First Commodity Corporation of Boston, Rebecca J. Schofield v. First Commodity Corporation of BostonCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1986
- Seville Industrial Machinery Corp. v. Southmost Machinery Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1984
51 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.