Ruth E. Oscar Charles Spinosa v. University Students Co-Operative Association, George Proper

dissenting:

I have no quarrel with the notion that these aggrieved plaintiffs may have some state law cause of action against “the last rampart” of sixties counterculture. I dissent because I am convinced that their inability to allege financial harm sinks their civil RICO claim.

The majority correctly concludes that RICO’s requirement of an injury to “business or property” does not require a plaintiff to plead injury to “business property.” Nevertheless, invocation of the talismanic phrase “property interest” does not suffice to satisfy the statute’s requirement of injury to property. In this circuit, we require civil RICO plaintiffs to allege that they have suffered a “financial loss or injury.” Berg v. First State Ins. Co., 915 F.2d 460, 464 (9th Cir.1990); First Pac. Bancorp, Inc. v. Bro, 847 F.2d 542 , 547 & n. 12 (9th Cir.1988). The proper focus is on the nature of the loss these plaintiffs have suffered, not on whether a “property right” exists. Even assuming that these plaintiffs have suffered some harm to a property interest, I fail to see how they have contended that that harm is financial in nature. Their complaint, therefore, cannot survive a motion to dismiss. Cf.…

If Berkeley, California, was the last bastion of sixties counterculture, Barrington Hall, the city’s oldest and largest student housing co-operative, was surely the last rampart. While much of Berkeley became stuffy and conventional, the residents of Barrington Hall clung to their freewheeling ways. A bit too freewheeling, according to two of Barrington’s neighbors. They claim that the co-op’s denizens engaged in massive drug-law violations, turning the neighborhood into a drug-enterprise zone. This, they allege, interfered with the use and enjoyment of their property. We consider whether they state a claim under RICO, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-1968 . 1

Facts

Barrington Hall’s reputation was larger than life, even by California standards. Known across the country as a “drug den and anarchist household,” Barrington Hall prided itself on fostering alternative lifestyles. S.F. Chronicle, April 9, 1990, at *810 B3, col. 1. Its bizarre and irreverent rituals included nude dinners with themes like Satan’s Village Wine Dinner and the Cannibal Wine Dinner — the latter complete with body-part shaped food. “It was hard on us vegetarians,” sniffed one former resident. Id. at B4, col. 1.

These…

939 F.2d 808 60 USLW 2104 , RICO Bus.Disp.Guide 7815 Ruth E. OSCAR; Charles Spinosa, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. UNIVERSITY STUDENTS CO-OPERATIVE ASSOCIATION, George Proper, et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 90-15750. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted June 13, 1991. Decided July 26, 1991. As Amended Oct. 29, 1991. Donald P. Driscoll, San Francisco, Cal., for plaintiffs-appellants. Arthur Brunwasser, San Francisco, Cal., for defendants-appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Before BRUNETTI, KOZINSKI and RYMER, Circuit Judges. KOZINSKI, Circuit Judge. 1 If Berkeley, California, was the last bastion of sixties counterculture, Barrington Hall, the city's oldest and largest student housing co-operative, was surely the last rampart. While much of Berkeley became stuffy and conventional, the residents of Barrington Hall clung to their freewheeling ways. A bit too freewheeling, according to two of Barrington's neighbors. They claim that the co-op's denizens engaged in massive drug-law violations, turning the neighborhood into a drug-enterprise zone. This, they allege, interfered with the use and…