Summary

William J. Brennan, Jr. H. J. Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Company…

But although proof that a RICO defendant has been involved in multiple criminal schemes would certainly be highly relevant to the inquiry into the continuity of the defendant's racketeering activity, it is implausible to suppose that Congress thought continuity might be shown only by proof of multiple schemes. The Eighth Circuit's test brings a rigidity to the available methods of proving a pattern that simply is not present in the idea of "continuity" itself; and it does so, moreover, by introducing a concept-the "scheme"-that appears nowhere in the language or legislative history of the Act.
Source: Wikisource

William J. Brennan, Jr. H. J. Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Company…

As we noted in Sedima, supra, at 496, n. 14, 105 S.Ct., at 3285, n. 14, Congress defined Title X's pattern requirement solely in terms of the relationship of the defendant's criminal acts one to another: " [C] riminal conduct forms a pattern if it embraces criminal acts that have the same or similar purposes, results, participants, victims, or methods of commission, or otherwise are interrelated by distinguishing characteristics and are not isolated events."
Source: Wikisource

William J. Brennan, Jr. H. J. Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Company…

A "scheme" is in the eye of the beholder, since whether a scheme exists depends on the level of generality at which criminal activity is viewed. For example, petitioners' allegation that Northwestern Bell attempted to subvert public utility commissioners who would be voting on the company's rates might be described as a single scheme to obtain a favorable rate, or as multiple schemes to obtain favorable votes from individual commissioners on the ratemaking decision.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature