TRY ME!
Notice Of Removal Guidance
Summary
When removing a case to federal court, include a section in your Notice of Removal about notifying the state court and adverse parties as per 28 U.S.C. § 1446(d). If filing in forma pauperis, wait for court approval before proceeding with certain actions. Ensure all state court pleadings are included in the notice to adverse parties. If a federal RICO claim is dismissed, state law claims may also be dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction. Include state law allegations in your RICO claim as predicate acts, but clarify they are not for separate federal adjudication.Full Conversation
In my Notice of removal do i include this section- Notice to State Court: - Promptly after filing this Notice of Removal and Prefiling Staement Defendants will give written notice thereof to all adverse parties and will file a copy of this Notice with the Clerk of the Superior court Massachusetts as required by * U.S.C. § *(d). Additionally I am filing a forma Pauperis and seeking funds to serve the several adverse parties. So I will not be giving a written notice until I get court approved to waive these fees .Right? How does this work?
It sounds like you are in the process of removing a case to federal court and dealing with filing in forma pauperis. Here are some points to consider:
- Notice to State Court: Yes, you should include the section about notifying the state court and adverse parties as required by * U.S.C. § *(d).
- In Forma Pauperis: If you are filing in forma pauperis, you may need to wait for the court to approve the waiver before proceeding with certain actions.
Do you have any specific concerns about the notice process or the in forma pauperis application?
- Notice to State Court: Yes, you should include the section about notifying the state court and adverse parties as required by * U.S.C. § *(d).
- In Forma Pauperis: If you are filing in forma pauperis, you may need to wait for the court to approve the waiver before proceeding with certain actions.
Do you have any specific concerns about the notice process or the in forma pauperis application?
If i need to revise here please do so Notice to State Court: - Promptly after filing this Notice of Removal and Prefiling Statement Defendants will give written notice there of to all adverse parties and will file a copy of this Notice with the Clerk of the Superior court Massachusetts as required by * U.S.C. § *(d). i need help because i have to include all the pleadings from the state court to several adverse parties. So how do I write this?
Sure, here's a revised version of your section:
---
Notice to State Court
Promptly after filing this Notice of Removal and Prefiling Statement, Defendants will give written notice thereof to all adverse parties and will file a copy of this Notice with the Clerk of the Superior Court of Massachusetts, as required by * U.S.C. § *(d). Additionally, Defendants will include all pleadings from the state court in this notice to the adverse parties. Defendants will provide written notice and file the necessary documents upon receiving court approval to waive the fees associated with serving these documents.
---
Does this address your concern about including the pleadings and waiting for fee waivers?
---
Notice to State Court
Promptly after filing this Notice of Removal and Prefiling Statement, Defendants will give written notice thereof to all adverse parties and will file a copy of this Notice with the Clerk of the Superior Court of Massachusetts, as required by * U.S.C. § *(d). Additionally, Defendants will include all pleadings from the state court in this notice to the adverse parties. Defendants will provide written notice and file the necessary documents upon receiving court approval to waive the fees associated with serving these documents.
---
Does this address your concern about including the pleadings and waiting for fee waivers?
so I do not file a copy of this Notice with the clerk of the superior court . Right?
You do need to file a copy of the Notice of Removal with the Clerk of the Superior Court promptly after filing it with the federal court, as required by * U.S.C. § *(d). This ensures that the state court is aware of the removal.
Is there anything else you need help with regarding the notice or the in forma pauperis process?
Is there anything else you need help with regarding the notice or the in forma pauperis process?
In Re Annulli v. panikkar, " Our determinations as to what constitutes a predicate act of racketeering activity and the time at which a civil RICO action accrues compel the conclusion that the District Court did not err in granting summary judgment for the defendants on plaintiffs-appellants' civil RICO claims. We further conclude that the District Court did not abuse its discretion under the supplemental jurisdiction statute, * U.S.C. § *(c), by dismissing plaintiffs' pendent state law claims after their predicate federal claims had been dismissed. " Please clarify as I have a claim in federal court for a state law claim illegal foreclsure, usuary and 93A against Mr. Tiernan (alleged RICO person) is this court staint that if i lose or my potential RICO claim invoking federal laws gets dismiss or I lose the case my stae court case could too get dismissed.
Case Rating: *
Based on the ruling in *In Re Annulli v. Panikkar*, if your federal RICO claim is dismissed, the court may also dismiss your state law claims due to lack of jurisdiction. This is because federal courts often decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over state law claims if all federal claims are dismissed.
Would you like more specific information about how to best present your state law claims?
Based on the ruling in *In Re Annulli v. Panikkar*, if your federal RICO claim is dismissed, the court may also dismiss your state law claims due to lack of jurisdiction. This is because federal courts often decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over state law claims if all federal claims are dismissed.
Would you like more specific information about how to best present your state law claims?
Please clarify that i would have to include my stae law allegations in my RICO claim in fedweral court , right? For example i would have to include illeagl foreclsoure, usury and 93A. Am I correct?
Case Rating: *
Yes, you should include your state law allegations in your RICO claim, as they can serve as predicate acts demonstrating the pattern of racketeering activity. Including claims like illegal foreclosure, usury, and violations of Chapter 93A can help substantiate your federal RICO claim.
Do you have any specific concerns about how to present these state law claims within your federal RICO claim?
Yes, you should include your state law allegations in your RICO claim, as they can serve as predicate acts demonstrating the pattern of racketeering activity. Including claims like illegal foreclosure, usury, and violations of Chapter 93A can help substantiate your federal RICO claim.
Do you have any specific concerns about how to present these state law claims within your federal RICO claim?
Please clarify becuase I have a pending lawsuit against mr. tiernan for illegal foreclsoure et alias.
Case Rating: *
It seems like you have a complex case involving both federal RICO claims and state law claims. Including your state law allegations (illegal foreclosure, usury, and Chapter 93A violations) within your RICO claim is indeed correct as they can serve as predicate acts.
Would you like more specific information on how to structure your RICO claim with these state law allegations?
It seems like you have a complex case involving both federal RICO claims and state law claims. Including your state law allegations (illegal foreclosure, usury, and Chapter 93A violations) within your RICO claim is indeed correct as they can serve as predicate acts.
Would you like more specific information on how to structure your RICO claim with these state law allegations?
So I can stae them but I will not be seeking federal ajudication of illegal foreclsoure usry because a court already has cognizance of these counts. Right?
Case Rating: *
Yes, you can state your state law allegations (illegal foreclosure, usury, and Chapter 93A violations) within your RICO claim. However, if a state court already has cognizance of these counts, the federal court may not need to adjudicate them separately. Do you need help with how to include these allegations in your RICO claim?
Yes, you can state your state law allegations (illegal foreclosure, usury, and Chapter 93A violations) within your RICO claim. However, if a state court already has cognizance of these counts, the federal court may not need to adjudicate them separately. Do you need help with how to include these allegations in your RICO claim?
I dont want to risk losing me state court cases as its strong . How do i ensure that in my RICO claim in federal court?
Case Rating: *
To ensure your state court cases are not jeopardized:
- Clearly state that the federal court should not adjudicate the state claims already under state court jurisdiction.
- Emphasize that your RICO claim is based on these state law violations as predicate acts, not for separate adjudication.
Would you like more specific guidance on drafting this part of your RICO claim?
To ensure your state court cases are not jeopardized:
- Clearly state that the federal court should not adjudicate the state claims already under state court jurisdiction.
- Emphasize that your RICO claim is based on these state law violations as predicate acts, not for separate adjudication.
Would you like more specific guidance on drafting this part of your RICO claim?
so these state law violations will be used as evidence to support my RICO claim. Do I need to state this in my Notice of removal?
Case Rating: *
Yes, it's a good idea to state in your Notice of Removal that the state law violations will be used as evidence to support your RICO claim. This helps clarify your intention to use these violations as predicate acts rather than seeking separate federal adjudication for them.
Would you need help drafting this specific section of your Notice of Removal?
Yes, it's a good idea to state in your Notice of Removal that the state law violations will be used as evidence to support your RICO claim. This helps clarify your intention to use these violations as predicate acts rather than seeking separate federal adjudication for them.
Would you need help drafting this specific section of your Notice of Removal?
Can you write the section to clrify. MA Sperior Court Suffock *-* defanadants against ralph Grieco and Apponaug Busuness sevice Inc. as counterclaimaints and u.S. District Court for the distrcit of R.I. Ms. Merritt against James tiernan C.A. Number *:*-cv *.
Case Rating: *
Sure, here's a draft for the section to clarify:
---
Notice of Removal
In the matter of the Superior Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk County Case No. *-*, where Ralph Grieco and Apponaug Business Service Inc. are defendants and counterclaimants, and in the matter of the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island Case No. *:*-cv-*, where Ms. Merritt is against James Tiernan, the following is stated:
Defendants promptly after filing this Notice of Removal and Prefiling Statement will give written notice thereof to all adverse parties and will file a copy of this Notice with the Clerk of the Superior Court of Massachusetts, as required by * U.S.C. § *(d). Defendants will include all pleadings from the state court in this notice to the adverse parties. Defendants will provide written notice and file the necessary documents upon receiving court approval to waive the fees associated with serving these documents.
Furthermore, state law violations such as illegal foreclosure, usury, and Chapter 93A violations will be used as evidence to support the federal RICO claim. These violations are included as predicate acts demonstrating a pattern of racketeering activity, and not for separate adjudication by the federal court.
---
Would you need any more adjustments or additional details?
Sure, here's a draft for the section to clarify:
---
Notice of Removal
In the matter of the Superior Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk County Case No. *-*, where Ralph Grieco and Apponaug Business Service Inc. are defendants and counterclaimants, and in the matter of the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island Case No. *:*-cv-*, where Ms. Merritt is against James Tiernan, the following is stated:
Defendants promptly after filing this Notice of Removal and Prefiling Statement will give written notice thereof to all adverse parties and will file a copy of this Notice with the Clerk of the Superior Court of Massachusetts, as required by * U.S.C. § *(d). Defendants will include all pleadings from the state court in this notice to the adverse parties. Defendants will provide written notice and file the necessary documents upon receiving court approval to waive the fees associated with serving these documents.
Furthermore, state law violations such as illegal foreclosure, usury, and Chapter 93A violations will be used as evidence to support the federal RICO claim. These violations are included as predicate acts demonstrating a pattern of racketeering activity, and not for separate adjudication by the federal court.
---
Would you need any more adjustments or additional details?
In the matter of the Superior Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk County Case No. *-*, where Ralph Grieco and Apponaug Business Service Inc.. I am the defendant ans counterclaimantd. the latter are the plaintiffs.
Case Rating: *
It looks like you are dealing with a complicated legal situation involving both state and federal courts. Here are some points to help you:
- Include in your Notice of Removal that state law violations (illegal foreclosure, usury, and Chapter 93A violations) will be used as evidence for your RICO claim.
- Clearly state that these violations are included as predicate acts, not for separate federal adjudication.
Would you like any further assistance or specific details regarding the inclusion of these points in your Notice of Removal?
It looks like you are dealing with a complicated legal situation involving both state and federal courts. Here are some points to help you:
- Include in your Notice of Removal that state law violations (illegal foreclosure, usury, and Chapter 93A violations) will be used as evidence for your RICO claim.
- Clearly state that these violations are included as predicate acts, not for separate federal adjudication.
Would you like any further assistance or specific details regarding the inclusion of these points in your Notice of Removal?
can you fix this: In the matter of the Superior Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk County Case No. *-*, where Ralph Grieco and Apponaug Business Service Inc. are defendants and counterclaimants, and in the matter of the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island Case No. *:*-cv-*, where Ms. Merritt is against James Tiernan, the following is stated:where Ralph Grieco and Apponaug Business Service are Plaintiffs
Case Rating: *
Sure, here is the corrected version:
"In the matter of the Superior Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk County Case No. *-*, where Ralph Grieco and Apponaug Business Service Inc. are defendants and counterclaimants, and in the matter of the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island Case No. *:*-cv-*, where Ms. Merritt is against James Tiernan, the following is stated: Ralph Grieco and Apponaug Business Service Inc. are plaintiffs."
Would you like any further adjustments?
Sure, here is the corrected version:
"In the matter of the Superior Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk County Case No. *-*, where Ralph Grieco and Apponaug Business Service Inc. are defendants and counterclaimants, and in the matter of the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island Case No. *:*-cv-*, where Ms. Merritt is against James Tiernan, the following is stated: Ralph Grieco and Apponaug Business Service Inc. are plaintiffs."
Would you like any further adjustments?
Please edit this sentence because Ralph Grieco and Apponaug Business Service Inc. are plaintiffs in th suffolk case and not counterclaimants
Case Rating: *
Sure, here is the corrected sentence:
"In the matter of the Superior Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk County Case No. *-*, where Ralph Grieco and Apponaug Business Service Inc. are plaintiffs, and in the matter of the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island Case No. *:*-cv-*, where Ms. Merritt is against James Tiernan, the following is stated:"
Sure, here is the corrected sentence:
"In the matter of the Superior Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk County Case No. *-*, where Ralph Grieco and Apponaug Business Service Inc. are plaintiffs, and in the matter of the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island Case No. *:*-cv-*, where Ms. Merritt is against James Tiernan, the following is stated:"
do i include Illegal foreclosure and mA and R.I. (in my state case i cited MA chapter * section * and not R.I usuary)The case involves substantial federal questions due to allegations of:
- Mail Fraud (* U.S.C. § *)
- Wire Fraud (* U.S.C. § *)
- Bankruptcy Fraud (* U.S.C. § *)
- Money Laundering (* U.S.C. § *)
- Embezzlement (* U.S.C. § *)
- Conspiracy (* U.S.C. § *)
- RICO Violations (* U.S.C. § * et seq.)
- Attorney Misconduct (Massachusetts Chapter *, Section *)
- Abuse of Process (Massachusetts Chapter *, Section 6F)
- Fraud on the Court (Massachusetts Chapter *, Section *)
- Elder Financial Abuse (Massachusetts Chapter 19A, Section *)
- Slander of Title (Massachusetts Chapter *, Section *)
Case Rating: *
It seems like you have a high-value case with multiple allegations involving both state and federal laws. Including the illegal foreclosure and Massachusetts usury law (Chapter *, Section *) in your federal RICO claim can strengthen your case.
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case?
If you agree, I will need to collect some information from you. First, can you please provide your name?
It seems like you have a high-value case with multiple allegations involving both state and federal laws. Including the illegal foreclosure and Massachusetts usury law (Chapter *, Section *) in your federal RICO claim can strengthen your case.
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case?
If you agree, I will need to collect some information from you. First, can you please provide your name?
Can i ask you another question regarding how to handle my attorny Eric renner who is handeling the two state court cases against Mr. grico and Mr. Tiernan. Background when Mr. tiernan recently purchased a default judgement against James Cronan and karen Merritt (procured by their bad faith and fraud) for $*,* for $*,* to be used to keep his ill gotten gains that they got from illegalal foreclsoure and usury we got sued on Superior court. I had to represent my self pro se and filed motions. I believe that this was Mr. Renner's responsability as if he had filed an injuction action against the parties in the lawsuit to stop further attacks it would not have happened. Am i right/
Case Rating: *
It sounds like a complex situation involving multiple legal proceedings. Here are a few considerations:
- Attorneys typically have a duty to take appropriate actions to protect their client's interests.
- If you believe Mr. Renner failed in his responsibilities, you might consider discussing your concerns directly with him.
- Filing a motion for an injunction can indeed be a strategy to prevent further legal actions, but it depends on the specifics of your case.
Would you like more specific information on how to address your concerns with your attorney, or do you have another question?
It sounds like a complex situation involving multiple legal proceedings. Here are a few considerations:
- Attorneys typically have a duty to take appropriate actions to protect their client's interests.
- If you believe Mr. Renner failed in his responsibilities, you might consider discussing your concerns directly with him.
- Filing a motion for an injunction can indeed be a strategy to prevent further legal actions, but it depends on the specifics of your case.
Would you like more specific information on how to address your concerns with your attorney, or do you have another question?
Additionally he told me about three weeks agao that he was going to file a motion to compell disclovery and a summary judgment action in the federal case against Tiernan and he has yet to do it. I would like a date in which he will file these motions. Can you write an email asking my questions and concerns.
Case Rating: *
Sure, here's a draft email for you:
---
Subject: Request for Status Update on Pending Motions
Dear Mr. Renner,
I hope this message finds you well.
I am writing to follow up on our recent discussions regarding the federal case against Mr. Tiernan. About three weeks ago, you mentioned that you would be filing a motion to compel discovery and a summary judgment motion. As of now, I have not seen any filings related to these actions.
Could you please provide an update on the status of these motions and give me a specific date by which you plan to file them? These motions are crucial for the progression of our case, and I would appreciate your prompt attention to this matter.
Additionally, I would like to discuss the possibility of filing an injunction action to prevent further legal attacks similar to the recent purchase of a default judgment by Mr. Tiernan. I believe taking this step could be beneficial in safeguarding our position.
Thank you for your attention to these concerns. I look forward to your prompt response.
Best regards,
[Your Name]
---
Would you like any changes or additional details in the email?
Sure, here's a draft email for you:
---
Subject: Request for Status Update on Pending Motions
Dear Mr. Renner,
I hope this message finds you well.
I am writing to follow up on our recent discussions regarding the federal case against Mr. Tiernan. About three weeks ago, you mentioned that you would be filing a motion to compel discovery and a summary judgment motion. As of now, I have not seen any filings related to these actions.
Could you please provide an update on the status of these motions and give me a specific date by which you plan to file them? These motions are crucial for the progression of our case, and I would appreciate your prompt attention to this matter.
Additionally, I would like to discuss the possibility of filing an injunction action to prevent further legal attacks similar to the recent purchase of a default judgment by Mr. Tiernan. I believe taking this step could be beneficial in safeguarding our position.
Thank you for your attention to these concerns. I look forward to your prompt response.
Best regards,
[Your Name]
---
Would you like any changes or additional details in the email?
The miranda decison. The court held"* U.S.C. § *(c). We have consistently interpreted the statutory requirement that a culpable person be "employed by or associated with" the RICO enterprise as meaning that the same entity cannot do double duty as both the RICO defendant and the RICO enterprise. See Arzuaga-Collazo v. Oriental Fed. Sav. Bank, * F.2d *, * (1st Cir. *) ("[T]he unlawful enterprise itself cannot also be the person the plaintiff charges with conducting it."); Odishelidze v. Aetna Life Casualty Co., * F.2d *, * (1st Cir. *) (per curiam) ("[I]t is clear that under § *(c) the 'person' alleged to be engaged in a racketeering
Case Rating: *
It looks like you have a multi-faceted case involving both state and federal issues. Here’s a breakdown of the key points you need to consider:
It looks like you have a multi-faceted case involving both state and federal issues. Here’s a breakdown of the key points you need to consider:
Key Points:
- State Law Violations: Illegal foreclosure, usury (Chapter *, Section *), and Chapter 93A violations can indeed strengthen your RICO claim as predicate acts.
- RICO and Federal Crimes: Allegations of mail fraud, wire fraud, bankruptcy fraud, money laundering, embezzlement, conspiracy, attorney misconduct, abuse of process, fraud on the court, elder financial abuse, and slander of title.
- Notice of Removal: Ensure state law violations are included as evidence for your RICO claim, not for separate adjudication.
- State Law Violations: Illegal foreclosure, usury (Chapter *, Section *), and Chapter 93A violations can indeed strengthen your RICO claim as predicate acts.
- RICO and Federal Crimes: Allegations of mail fraud, wire fraud, bankruptcy fraud, money laundering, embezzlement, conspiracy, attorney misconduct, abuse of process, fraud on the court, elder financial abuse, and slander of title.
- Notice of Removal: Ensure state law violations are included as evidence for your RICO claim, not for separate adjudication.
Specific Section for Notice of Removal:
"In the matter of the Superior Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk County Case No. *-*, where Ralph Grieco and Apponaug Business Service Inc. are plaintiffs, and in the matter of the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island Case No. *:*-cv-*, where Ms. Merritt is against James Tiernan, the following is stated:
Defendants promptly after filing this Notice of Removal and Prefiling Statement will give written notice thereof to all adverse parties and will file a copy of this Notice with the Clerk of the Superior Court of Massachusetts, as required by * U.S.C. § *(d). Defendants will include all pleadings from the state court in this notice to the adverse parties. Defendants will provide written notice and file the necessary documents upon receiving court approval to waive the fees associated with serving these documents.
Furthermore, state law violations such as illegal foreclosure, usury (Massachusetts Chapter *, Section *), and Chapter 93A violations will be used as evidence to support the federal RICO claim. These violations are included as predicate acts demonstrating a pattern of racketeering activity, and not for separate adjudication by the federal court."
"In the matter of the Superior Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk County Case No. *-*, where Ralph Grieco and Apponaug Business Service Inc. are plaintiffs, and in the matter of the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island Case No. *:*-cv-*, where Ms. Merritt is against James Tiernan, the following is stated:
Defendants promptly after filing this Notice of Removal and Prefiling Statement will give written notice thereof to all adverse parties and will file a copy of this Notice with the Clerk of the Superior Court of Massachusetts, as required by * U.S.C. § *(d). Defendants will include all pleadings from the state court in this notice to the adverse parties. Defendants will provide written notice and file the necessary documents upon receiving court approval to waive the fees associated with serving these documents.
Furthermore, state law violations such as illegal foreclosure, usury (Massachusetts Chapter *, Section *), and Chapter 93A violations will be used as evidence to support the federal RICO claim. These violations are included as predicate acts demonstrating a pattern of racketeering activity, and not for separate adjudication by the federal court."
Email to Your Attorney:
Subject: Request for Status Update on Pending Motions
Dear Mr. Renner,
I hope this message finds you well.
I am writing to follow up on our recent discussions regarding the federal case against Mr. Tiernan. About three weeks ago, you mentioned that you would be filing a motion to compel discovery and a summary judgment motion. As of now, I have not seen any filings related to these actions.
Could you please provide an update on the status of these motions and give me a specific date by which you plan to file them? These motions are crucial for the progression of our case, and I would appreciate your prompt attention to this matter.
Additionally, I would like to discuss the possibility of filing an injunction action to prevent further legal attacks similar to the recent purchase of a default judgment by Mr. Tiernan. I believe taking this step could be beneficial in safeguarding our position.
Thank you for your attention to these concerns. I look forward to your prompt response.
Best regards,
[Your Name]
Would you like additional assistance or have any further questions?
Subject: Request for Status Update on Pending Motions
Dear Mr. Renner,
I hope this message finds you well.
I am writing to follow up on our recent discussions regarding the federal case against Mr. Tiernan. About three weeks ago, you mentioned that you would be filing a motion to compel discovery and a summary judgment motion. As of now, I have not seen any filings related to these actions.
Could you please provide an update on the status of these motions and give me a specific date by which you plan to file them? These motions are crucial for the progression of our case, and I would appreciate your prompt attention to this matter.
Additionally, I would like to discuss the possibility of filing an injunction action to prevent further legal attacks similar to the recent purchase of a default judgment by Mr. Tiernan. I believe taking this step could be beneficial in safeguarding our position.
Thank you for your attention to these concerns. I look forward to your prompt response.
Best regards,
[Your Name]
Would you like additional assistance or have any further questions?
activity . . . must be an entity distinct from the 'enterprise.'") (footnote omitted); Schofield v. First Commodity Corp., * F.2d *, *-* (1st Cir. *) (identifying similar rulings in other circuits). Because the racketeer and the enterprise must be distinct, Miranda's claim against the Bank cannot succeed." In my case Defendants owned and operated two businesses including Classic display Inc and * Fountains Street LLC which were inflatrated by a group of persons including Mr. Grieco, Mr tiernan, Mr Fagan and their attorneys and pensoc Trust Company arising out of the groups RiCO enterprise 's operation of an illegal foreclsoure rescue lending scam. The Defandants have lost their buinesses and properties as a direct result of the groups racketteering actions. So am I establishing tow distict eneterprsies the buinesses and the group of persons?
Case Rating: *
It seems you are indeed trying to establish two distinct entities: the businesses (Classic Display Inc. and * Fountains Street LLC) and the group of persons (Mr. Grieco, Mr. Tiernan, Mr. Fagan, their attorneys, and Pensoc Trust Company). This distinction is crucial for your RICO claim.
Would you like specific guidance on how to present these distinctions in your RICO claim?
It seems you are indeed trying to establish two distinct entities: the businesses (Classic Display Inc. and * Fountains Street LLC) and the group of persons (Mr. Grieco, Mr. Tiernan, Mr. Fagan, their attorneys, and Pensoc Trust Company). This distinction is crucial for your RICO claim.
Would you like specific guidance on how to present these distinctions in your RICO claim?
Section *(c) does not recognize corporate liability on the enterprise's part under a theory of respondeat superior, even though individual officers or employees of the enterprise, acting within the scope and course of their employment, may themselves be culpable. See id. at *-*. However although I can not list the two buinesses taking part in the RICO schmene this is not to say that i can not list their officeers as the RICO eneterprise conducing the money laundering within the two buinesses. Am I right?
Case Rating: *
Yes, you are correct. Under * U.S.C. § *(c), you can list individual officers or employees of the businesses as participants in the RICO enterprise, even though the businesses themselves cannot be listed as the enterprise. This means you can include the individuals conducting the money laundering within the two businesses.
Do you need further help with structuring your RICO claim?
Yes, you are correct. Under * U.S.C. § *(c), you can list individual officers or employees of the businesses as participants in the RICO enterprise, even though the businesses themselves cannot be listed as the enterprise. This means you can include the individuals conducting the money laundering within the two businesses.
Do you need further help with structuring your RICO claim?
I believe that i have a ture RICO claim . Textbook.
Case Rating: *
It sounds like you may have a strong RICO claim, given the multiple allegations and the detailed nature of your case. Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case?
If you agree, I will need to collect some information from you. First, can you please provide your name?
It sounds like you may have a strong RICO claim, given the multiple allegations and the detailed nature of your case. Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case?
If you agree, I will need to collect some information from you. First, can you please provide your name?
To succeed on a claim under * U.S.C. § *(c), Miranda must plead and prove that the defendants' scheme amounted to, or posed a threat of, continuing criminal activity. See H.J. Inc. v. In my case getting the letter that the group intended to foreclose on * Oak Street which is the last remaing piece of property which they have yet acquired would show the continuing criminal activity. Additionally would the latest defualt judgement support *(c)?
Case Rating: *
It seems like you have a potentially strong RICO claim due to the ongoing criminal activities and the default judgment supporting your case. Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case?
If you agree, I will need to collect some information from you. First, can you please provide your name?
It seems like you have a potentially strong RICO claim due to the ongoing criminal activities and the default judgment supporting your case. Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case?
If you agree, I will need to collect some information from you. First, can you please provide your name?
Here :Karen Merritt
Phone: *-*-*
Zipcode: *
Email: karen.hgm@aol.com
Reason: Mortgage fraud conspiracy, TILA RESPA and Dodd-Frank Act violations, mail fraud conspiracy, bankruptcy fraud conspiracy, elder financial abuse, embezzlement, abuse of process, malicious interference, slander of title, seeking damages for constitutional violations, and financial mismanagement and fraud. Under the RICO Act, * U.S.C. § *, I believe that I could possibly have a RICO claim. Around *, my two businesses, one being a display manufacturing company and the other owning a valuable commercial building, became involved in money laundering, loan sharking, extortion, mail fraud, and bankruptcy fraud. The "RICO enterprise" now have title to not only the commercial building but also my former wife's two properties. Under section *(a)(b)(c), I have evidence to support my claims. The pattern of racketeering was also infiltrated by my trusted CPA.
Case Rating: *
It seems you have a significant legal matter that could potentially benefit from professional legal representation. Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case?
If you agree, I will need to collect some information from you. First, can you please provide your name?
It seems you have a significant legal matter that could potentially benefit from professional legal representation. Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case?
If you agree, I will need to collect some information from you. First, can you please provide your name?
Please confirm that you have received what you need.
Case Rating: *
It seems you have a strong case involving multiple serious allegations that could benefit from professional legal representation. Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case? If you agree, I will need to collect some information from you.
Could you please provide your name?
It seems you have a strong case involving multiple serious allegations that could benefit from professional legal representation. Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case? If you agree, I will need to collect some information from you.
Could you please provide your name?
Please acknowledge that here it is:Here :Karen Merritt Phone: *-*-* Zipcode: * Email: karen.hgm@aol.com Reason: Mortgage fraud conspiracy, TILA RESPA and Dodd-Frank Act violations, mail fraud conspiracy, bankruptcy fraud conspiracy, elder financial abuse, embezzlement, abuse of process, malicious interference, slander of title, seeking damages for constitutional violations, and financial mismanagement and fraud. Under the RICO Act, * U.S.C. § *, I believe that I could possibly have a RICO claim. Around *, my two businesses, one being a display manufacturing company and the other owning a valuable commercial building, became involved in money laundering, loan sharking, extortion, mail fraud, and bankruptcy fraud. The "RICO enterprise" now have title to not only the commercial building but also my former wife's two properties. Under section *(a)(b)(c), I have evidence to support my claims. The pattern of racketeering was also infiltrated by my trusted CPA.
Case Rating: *
Your case involves multiple serious allegations under the RICO Act, which could potentially benefit from professional legal representation.
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case? If you agree, I will need to collect some information from you.
First, can you provide more details about the issue?
Your case involves multiple serious allegations under the RICO Act, which could potentially benefit from professional legal representation.
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case? If you agree, I will need to collect some information from you.
First, can you provide more details about the issue?
STOP> Why are you ignoring what I have sent to you twice in this matter? Please read what i just sent to you answering your questions.
Case Rating: *
It seems you have a high-value case involving multiple serious legal allegations that could benefit from professional legal representation. Let me help you connect to local lawyers.
Phone: *-*-*
Zipcode: *
Email: karen.hgm@aol.com
Reason: Mortgage fraud conspiracy, TILA RESPA and Dodd-Frank Act violations, mail fraud conspiracy, bankruptcy fraud conspiracy, elder financial abuse, embezzlement, abuse of process, malicious interference, slander of title, seeking damages for constitutional violations, and financial mismanagement and fraud. Under the RICO Act, * U.S.C. § *, I believe that I could possibly have a RICO claim. Around *, my two businesses, one being a display manufacturing company and the other owning a valuable commercial building, became involved in money laundering, loan sharking, extortion, mail fraud, and bankruptcy fraud. The "RICO enterprise" now have title to not only the commercial building but also my former wife's two properties. Under section *(a)(b)(c), I have evidence to support my claims. The pattern of racketeering was also infiltrated by my trusted CPA.
I will now proceed to connect you with local lawyers who can assist with your case.
It seems you have a high-value case involving multiple serious legal allegations that could benefit from professional legal representation. Let me help you connect to local lawyers.
Karen Merritt
Phone: *-*-*
Zipcode: *
Email: karen.hgm@aol.com
Reason: Mortgage fraud conspiracy, TILA RESPA and Dodd-Frank Act violations, mail fraud conspiracy, bankruptcy fraud conspiracy, elder financial abuse, embezzlement, abuse of process, malicious interference, slander of title, seeking damages for constitutional violations, and financial mismanagement and fraud. Under the RICO Act, * U.S.C. § *, I believe that I could possibly have a RICO claim. Around *, my two businesses, one being a display manufacturing company and the other owning a valuable commercial building, became involved in money laundering, loan sharking, extortion, mail fraud, and bankruptcy fraud. The "RICO enterprise" now have title to not only the commercial building but also my former wife's two properties. Under section *(a)(b)(c), I have evidence to support my claims. The pattern of racketeering was also infiltrated by my trusted CPA.
I will now proceed to connect you with local lawyers who can assist with your case.
Put another way, a claim for wrongful discharge cannot be successfully pursued under civil RICO when the injury itself is not the result of a predicate act. See Pujol v. Shearson/American Express, Inc., * F.2d *, * (1st Cir. *) (injury stemming from discharge is not actionable under RICO because it does not flow from defendant's acts of mail and wire fraud); In my case I can clearly show several letters staing that they were going to foreclose via mail fruad stemming from mortgae fruad , the foreclsoure deed and the * hiur notice. Therby I was injuried as a result of a predicate act. Am I right?
Case Rating: *
You are correct. If you can demonstrate that your injury (such as the foreclosure) resulted directly from predicate acts like mail fraud and mortgage fraud, you have a stronger basis for a RICO claim. Including evidence like the foreclosure deed and *-hour notice can support your argument that these fraudulent acts caused your injury.
Would you like help with anything else?
You are correct. If you can demonstrate that your injury (such as the foreclosure) resulted directly from predicate acts like mail fraud and mortgage fraud, you have a stronger basis for a RICO claim. Including evidence like the foreclosure deed and *-hour notice can support your argument that these fraudulent acts caused your injury.
Would you like help with anything else?
what federal law was violaited by Mr. Grieco when he advised Mr. cronan to trnasfer his shares of his buiness to Mr. Tiernan with flase statements including that he would return them next year but didi not.
Case Rating: *
It appears that Mr. Grieco may have violated federal laws related to fraud and potentially securities laws. Here are some relevant federal statutes:
- Wire Fraud (* U.S.C. § *): Involves using electronic communications to carry out a scheme to defraud.
- Securities Fraud (* U.S.C. § 78j(b)): Involves making false statements or omissions in connection with the purchase or sale of securities.
- Mail Fraud (* U.S.C. § *): Involves using the postal service to execute a scheme to defraud.
Would you like more information on how these laws apply to your situation?
It appears that Mr. Grieco may have violated federal laws related to fraud and potentially securities laws. Here are some relevant federal statutes:
- Wire Fraud (* U.S.C. § *): Involves using electronic communications to carry out a scheme to defraud.
- Securities Fraud (* U.S.C. § 78j(b)): Involves making false statements or omissions in connection with the purchase or sale of securities.
- Mail Fraud (* U.S.C. § *): Involves using the postal service to execute a scheme to defraud.
Would you like more information on how these laws apply to your situation?
Next is the bankruptcy fruad Mr. grieco advised mr. Cronan to move from chapter * to chapter * to release his ownership of a commercial property with the promise that they would return his name after the transfer which was under the bankruptcy court. Is this bankruptcy fraud?
Case Rating: *
It sounds like Mr. Grieco's advice to Mr. Cronan to move from Chapter * to Chapter * bankruptcy with false promises could indeed constitute bankruptcy fraud. Here are some relevant points:
- Bankruptcy Fraud (* U.S.C. § *): It involves fraudulent actions in bankruptcy proceedings, such as making false statements or promises to deceive creditors or the court.
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case?
It sounds like Mr. Grieco's advice to Mr. Cronan to move from Chapter * to Chapter * bankruptcy with false promises could indeed constitute bankruptcy fraud. Here are some relevant points:
- Bankruptcy Fraud (* U.S.C. § *): It involves fraudulent actions in bankruptcy proceedings, such as making false statements or promises to deceive creditors or the court.
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case?
Additioanlly because this was just one predicate act in a series of predicate acts the statutute of limtations starts from the last predicate act?
Case Rating: *
To address your question:
- Under the RICO Act, the statute of limitations for a civil RICO claim typically begins to run from the time the plaintiff knew or should have known of the injury.
- When multiple predicate acts form a pattern of racketeering activity, the statute of limitations may start from the last predicate act that caused the injury to the plaintiff.
Would you like more detailed information on how the statute of limitations applies to your case?
To address your question:
- Under the RICO Act, the statute of limitations for a civil RICO claim typically begins to run from the time the plaintiff knew or should have known of the injury.
- When multiple predicate acts form a pattern of racketeering activity, the statute of limitations may start from the last predicate act that caused the injury to the plaintiff.
Would you like more detailed information on how the statute of limitations applies to your case?
Yes which froms a stronger RICO cl;aim because the court wants to see a pattern. Right?
Case Rating: *
Yes, the court looks for a pattern of racketeering activity to establish a strong RICO claim. Here are some key points to strengthen your claim:
- Multiple Predicate Acts: Demonstrate a series of related predicate acts, such as mail fraud, wire fraud, bankruptcy fraud, and money laundering.
- Continuity and Relationship: Show that these acts are related and pose a threat of continued criminal activity.
- Direct Injury: Prove that your injury directly resulted from these predicate acts.
Would you like further assistance with specific aspects of your RICO claim?
Yes, the court looks for a pattern of racketeering activity to establish a strong RICO claim. Here are some key points to strengthen your claim:
- Multiple Predicate Acts: Demonstrate a series of related predicate acts, such as mail fraud, wire fraud, bankruptcy fraud, and money laundering.
- Continuity and Relationship: Show that these acts are related and pose a threat of continued criminal activity.
- Direct Injury: Prove that your injury directly resulted from these predicate acts.
Would you like further assistance with specific aspects of your RICO claim?
To succeed, a RICO conspiracy claim must charge that defendants knowingly entered into an agreement to commit two or more predicate crimes. See Feinstein, * F.2d at * ("[E]ach defendant in a RICO conspiracy case must have joined knowingly in the scheme and been involved himself, directly or indirectly, in the commission of at least two predicate offenses."); United States v. Angiulo, * F.2d *, * (1st Cir.), cert. denied, * U.S. *, *, * S.Ct. *, *, * L.Ed.2d *, * (*); United States v. Winter, * F.2d *, * (1st Cir. *), cert. denied, * U.S. *, * S.Ct. *, *, * L.Ed.2d * (*). Luke Travis sent me * letters threatening foreclsoure can I list him as conspiring? Idont know if he knew that what he was helping to do was illegal but all he had to do is look at the interest rate that he was stating that I owed as it was cleraly usuarious. What is defined as "knowingly"
Case Rating: *
To establish "knowingly" in a RICO conspiracy claim, it means that a defendant must be aware of the scheme and intentionally participate in it. Here's how it can be defined:
- Awareness: The defendant knew of the scheme's existence.
- Intent: The defendant intended to further the scheme's illegal objectives.
- Participation: The defendant actively engaged in actions that supported the scheme.
If Luke Travis was aware of the usurious interest rates and still sent foreclosure letters, this could potentially show "knowing" participation.
Would you like more detailed guidance on how to present this in your claim?
To establish "knowingly" in a RICO conspiracy claim, it means that a defendant must be aware of the scheme and intentionally participate in it. Here's how it can be defined:
- Awareness: The defendant knew of the scheme's existence.
- Intent: The defendant intended to further the scheme's illegal objectives.
- Participation: The defendant actively engaged in actions that supported the scheme.
If Luke Travis was aware of the usurious interest rates and still sent foreclosure letters, this could potentially show "knowing" participation.
Would you like more detailed guidance on how to present this in your claim?
Please explain:[W]e hold that standing may be founded only upon injury from overt acts that are also section * predicate acts, and not upon any and all overt acts furthering a RICO conspiracy."). Congress painstakingly enumerated a complete list of predicate acts in * U.S.C. § *(*).
Case Rating: *
This statement clarifies that for someone to have standing in a RICO case, they must show they were injured by actions that qualify as predicate acts under * U.S.C. § *(*), not just any action related to a RICO conspiracy. Predicate acts include crimes such as mail fraud, wire fraud, and money laundering.
Would you like further details on which specific acts are considered predicate under * U.S.C. § *(*)?
This statement clarifies that for someone to have standing in a RICO case, they must show they were injured by actions that qualify as predicate acts under * U.S.C. § *(*), not just any action related to a RICO conspiracy. Predicate acts include crimes such as mail fraud, wire fraud, and money laundering.
Would you like further details on which specific acts are considered predicate under * U.S.C. § *(*)?
not just any action related to a RICO conspiracy. what would these acts include/
Case Rating: *
The predicate acts under * U.S.C. § *(*) include, but are not limited to:
- Mail Fraud (* U.S.C. § *)
- Wire Fraud (* U.S.C. § *)
- Bankruptcy Fraud (* U.S.C. § *)
- Money Laundering (* U.S.C. § *)
- Embezzlement (* U.S.C. § *)
- Securities Fraud (* U.S.C. § 78j(b))
- Extortion (* U.S.C. § *)
- Bribery (* U.S.C. § *)
Would you like more information on any specific predicate act?
The predicate acts under * U.S.C. § *(*) include, but are not limited to:
- Mail Fraud (* U.S.C. § *)
- Wire Fraud (* U.S.C. § *)
- Bankruptcy Fraud (* U.S.C. § *)
- Money Laundering (* U.S.C. § *)
- Embezzlement (* U.S.C. § *)
- Securities Fraud (* U.S.C. § 78j(b))
- Extortion (* U.S.C. § *)
- Bribery (* U.S.C. § *)
Would you like more information on any specific predicate act?
they must show they were injured by actions that qualify as predicate acts under * U.S.C. § *(*), not just any action related to a RICO conspiracy. i understand what the predicate acts are but can you qualify what "any action related to a RICO conspiarcy" would be?
Case Rating: *
"Any action related to a RICO conspiracy" refers to actions that support or are part of the overall illegal scheme but do not qualify as specific predicate acts under * U.S.C. § *(*). These could include:
- Planning or organizing the scheme
- Recruiting participants
- Covering up illegal activities
However, for standing, the injury must result from the specific predicate acts.
Would you like more details on how to differentiate these actions in your claim?
"Any action related to a RICO conspiracy" refers to actions that support or are part of the overall illegal scheme but do not qualify as specific predicate acts under * U.S.C. § *(*). These could include:
- Planning or organizing the scheme
- Recruiting participants
- Covering up illegal activities
However, for standing, the injury must result from the specific predicate acts.
Would you like more details on how to differentiate these actions in your claim?
So, even if the amended complaint pleaded the money-laundering scheme as a pattern of racketeering activity, nothing would be gained unless the claimant could establish that her injury resulted from the RICO activity. So I have to demonstrate that all of the predicate acts including mail fruad money laundering was the result of my injury.
Case Rating: *
Yes, for a successful RICO claim, you need to demonstrate that your injury directly resulted from the predicate acts, such as mail fraud and money laundering. Here are some key points to strengthen your case:
- Direct Injury: Show that your injury (e.g., financial loss, foreclosure) was directly caused by the predicate acts.
- Evidence: Provide detailed evidence linking each predicate act to your injury (e.g., foreclosure notices, fraudulent documents).
- Pattern of Activity: Establish a pattern of racketeering activity, showing continuity and relatedness among the predicate acts.
Would you like help drafting a section of your complaint that clearly establishes these points?
Yes, for a successful RICO claim, you need to demonstrate that your injury directly resulted from the predicate acts, such as mail fraud and money laundering. Here are some key points to strengthen your case:
- Direct Injury: Show that your injury (e.g., financial loss, foreclosure) was directly caused by the predicate acts.
- Evidence: Provide detailed evidence linking each predicate act to your injury (e.g., foreclosure notices, fraudulent documents).
- Pattern of Activity: Establish a pattern of racketeering activity, showing continuity and relatedness among the predicate acts.
Would you like help drafting a section of your complaint that clearly establishes these points?
The civil RICO does not have a stte of limtations. Howver there a 4 years statute of limitations which is based on the accraul of a predicate act. In * Mr. Cronan got repealed from his buiness and property based on fruad by his partners and his personal CPA commiting embezzlemt. At that time we hired an attorney. I signed a contingency agreement based solely on my limitted funds . He signed two contratcs one for Mr. Cronan's buiness dispute case breach of a partnership. (not claiming fruad or embezzlement) My case breach of ficucuary duty and 93A as I signed an note involving my home an another proeperty based on friad ab
Case Rating: *
It seems you have a complex case involving multiple legal issues related to fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and a potential RICO claim. Here are some key points:
- Statute of Limitations: For civil RICO claims, the *-year statute of limitations starts from the date you discovered the injury caused by the predicate act.
- Breach of Fiduciary Duty: This involves proving that the fiduciary relationship was violated, resulting in damage.
- Chapter 93A: This Massachusetts law addresses unfair or deceptive business practices.
Would you like assistance with drafting any specific documents or further legal advice on your case?
It seems you have a complex case involving multiple legal issues related to fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and a potential RICO claim. Here are some key points:
- Statute of Limitations: For civil RICO claims, the *-year statute of limitations starts from the date you discovered the injury caused by the predicate act.
- Breach of Fiduciary Duty: This involves proving that the fiduciary relationship was violated, resulting in damage.
- Chapter 93A: This Massachusetts law addresses unfair or deceptive business practices.
Would you like assistance with drafting any specific documents or further legal advice on your case?
initio. Once the 93A letteres were sent to Mr. Grieco and Mr. tiernan they filed a claim against me in superior court declaratory judment action seeking no money.. My attorney said this was a nother case and that I would have to pay him to represent me. I declaines and opposed his reguriement stating that the lawsuit was a continuation of the 93A letter that he sent . At that time he sent a change of contract which James cronan signed based on hourly fee. I didnt signe it. My cronan could not keep up with the invlices and Mr. renner sent two emails ending his representaion on Jame's case based on the fact that he was continuallu getting threatened by
Case Rating: *
It seems like you have a complex and potentially strong legal case involving multiple serious allegations against Mr. Grieco, Mr. Tiernan, and their associates. Your situation includes significant issues such as fraud, RICO violations, and breach of fiduciary duty.
In Massachusetts, the attorney-client relationship should be managed carefully, especially when dealing with complex cases. Here are some points to consider:
- Breach of Fiduciary Duty: This involves proving that the fiduciary relationship was violated, resulting in damage. Ensure you have evidence of this breach.
- Chapter 93A: This Massachusetts law addresses unfair or deceptive business practices. Your case seems to involve violations of Chapter 93A.
- Attorney's Responsibility: If you believe your attorney did not fulfill their duty, you may discuss this with them or consider seeking new legal representation.
Would you like help drafting specific legal documents or further advice on managing communications with your attorney?
It seems like you have a complex and potentially strong legal case involving multiple serious allegations against Mr. Grieco, Mr. Tiernan, and their associates. Your situation includes significant issues such as fraud, RICO violations, and breach of fiduciary duty.
In Massachusetts, the attorney-client relationship should be managed carefully, especially when dealing with complex cases. Here are some points to consider:
- Breach of Fiduciary Duty: This involves proving that the fiduciary relationship was violated, resulting in damage. Ensure you have evidence of this breach.
- Chapter 93A: This Massachusetts law addresses unfair or deceptive business practices. Your case seems to involve violations of Chapter 93A.
- Attorney's Responsibility: If you believe your attorney did not fulfill their duty, you may discuss this with them or consider seeking new legal representation.
Would you like help drafting specific legal documents or further advice on managing communications with your attorney?
opposing counsel. Additonally during that time mr. Cronan had hired a forensic CPA who reported extensive commingling of funds, embezzelemt. From * James and I have been a victim of mail fraud and extortion as Mr. Tiernan and Mr Grieco and others try to obtain, * Oak street , which is the last piece of property that they have a suppose secuity interest in from the mortgae fruad in *. In October * I was a victim of an illrgal eviction stemming from the * mortgae fraud. So does mine and Jmes 's stautute of l;imtation begin in * when James got expelled or in October * or the statute of limitations has not ebegun because they are still extorting me and James today ?
Case Rating: *
The statute of limitations for a civil RICO claim typically begins when the plaintiff knew or should have known of the injury caused by the predicate acts. Here are some points to consider:
- Initial Injury Discovery: If you discovered the injury (mail fraud and extortion) in *, that could start the statute of limitations.
- Ongoing Activity: If the extortion and fraud are ongoing, the statute might be considered to continue extending, due to the continuous nature of the RICO violation.
Would you like specific advice on documenting this ongoing activity to support your case?
The statute of limitations for a civil RICO claim typically begins when the plaintiff knew or should have known of the injury caused by the predicate acts. Here are some points to consider:
- Initial Injury Discovery: If you discovered the injury (mail fraud and extortion) in *, that could start the statute of limitations.
- Ongoing Activity: If the extortion and fraud are ongoing, the statute might be considered to continue extending, due to the continuous nature of the RICO violation.
Would you like specific advice on documenting this ongoing activity to support your case?
Start a new chat