Legal Memorandum: Commercial Competitor's Standing in RICO Claims

Issue: When will a commercial competitor have standing to assert a RICO claim?

The Supreme Court has refused to dismiss a complaint and held that a losing bidder who was a commercial competitor suffered direct injury and had standing to assert a RICO claim.  Bridge v. Phoenix Bond & Indem. Co., 553 U.S. 639 (2008) TA s "Bridge v. Phoenix Bond & Indemnity Co. (2008)" ; see also Holmes v. Securities Investor Protection Corp. 503 U.S. 258, 272 n. 20 (1992) TA l "Holmes v. Securities Investor Protection Corp. 503 U.S. 258 (1992)" s "Holmes v. Securities Investor Protection Corp. (1992)" c 1  (the Court warned that in this context its “use of the term ‘direct’ should merely be understood as a reference to the proximate-cause enquiry that is informed by the concerns” of justice and administrability); In re Neurontin Marketing & Sales Practices Litig. 712 F.3d 21, 34-36 (1st Cir. 2013) TA l "In re Neurontin Marketing & Sales Practices Litig. 712 F.3d 21 (1st Cir. 2013)" s "In re Neurontin Marketing & Sales Practices Litig. (1st Cir. 2013)" c 1  (in RICO action, defendant manufacturer’s fraudulent marketing of off-label uses for prescription drug proximately caused injury to third-party payor, even though marketing was directed only to non-party prescribing doctors; injury to payor was foreseeable and natural consequence of scheme to fraudulently inflate number of prescriptions paid, there was no risk of multiple recovery by physicians, who did not pay for prescriptions, and payor was in best position to enforce law as party directly suffering economic injury); BCS Services, […]