Rico provides for both civil and criminal causes of action, but it is a legal quagmire to litigate. There are federal prosecutors that do not even like to involve themselves in it. The fact patterns of each case are often slippery when used to established the required RICO predicates at trial. Several years ago I was consulted on a civil RICO matter. The client was represented by a fairly well known firm. The case was pending in federal court for two years. The court had jurisdiction under the RICO claim because it presented a federal question. The court also had jurisdiction over a number of alternate state claims under its pendent jurisdiction. The defense filed a motion to dismiss because the complaint alleged that the conduct which was the subject of the RICO claim was perpetrated through the use of intra state telephone service rather than inter state telephone service. The court granted the motion, dismissed the RICO claim and declined to retain jurisdiction of the pendant state claims. The plaintiff had wasted two years and a huge amount of money.

The lesson to be learned is why complicate matters unnecessarily. The abstractors' problems are mainly problems of contract breach. These are simple cases to win. If the work was done competently, and accepted by the client...the abstractor's bill must be paid.

The problem becomes purely academic however since the abstractors seem to satisfy themselves with complaining about the problem rather than doing something about it. Until they are ready to get off their asses, and spend a few bucks to enforce their claims...there is very little that can be done for them.