Roma Construction Company and Peter Zanni v. Ralph R. Arusso
Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
1ConcurrenceLynch, Circuit Judge
At issue is whether the plaintiffs have stated a claim under Rule 12(b)(6), Fed.R.Civ.P.7 The plaintiffs’ complaint cannot be dismissed “if relief could be granted under any set of facts that could be proved consistent with the allegations.” NOW v. Scheidler, 510 U.S. 249, 256, 114 S.Ct. 798, 803, 127 L.Ed.2d 99 (1994). The district court dismissed the claims because it imported into RICO a *578standing requirement that the plaintiffs must be “innocent victims.” See Roma Constr. Co. v. aRusso, 906 F.Supp. 78, 81 (D.R.I.1995). The review by this court of the dismissal is de novo. Aulson v.…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Landgraf v. USI Film ProductsSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Sedima, S. P. R. L. v. Imrex Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
- H. J. Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
- United States v. TurketteSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.