Pattern of Criminal Activity
As I reported in previous posts, a civil RICO plaintiff must prove that he suffered damages by reason of the defendant’s criminal activity. In addition, RICO requires that the defendant’s criminal acts must constitute a “pattern” of criminal activity. A single criminal act, short-term criminal conduct, or criminal actions that bear no relationship to each other do not support a RICO claim. The United States Supreme Court has ruled that criminal actions constitute a “pattern” only if they are related and continuous. In order to be “related,” the criminal acts must involve the same victims, have the same methods of commission, involve the same participants, or be related in some other fashion. A pattern may be sufficiently continuous if the criminal actions occurred over a substantial period of time or posed a threat of indefinite duration. Accordingly, even if the plaintiff has been injured by a criminal act, he will not have a RICO claim unless that criminal act is part of a larger pattern of criminal activity.
As with most RICO issues the “pattern” requirement has nuances and is often difficult to identify in practice. For example, as noted above, a single criminal act or short term criminal conduct may not support a RICO claim, but a single scheme may be sufficient to establish a pattern of racketeering if the plaintiff establishes that the predicate acts themselves amount to, or constitute a threat of, continuing racketeering activity.