Rupert

Rupert v. Bond

Good Law
68 F. Supp. 3d 1142·2014 WL 4775375·2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 134083
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaSeptember 22, 2014Case No. 12-cv-05292-BLFCalifornia12,254 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Freeman, J.

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS; DENYING DEFENDANTS GILE R. DOWNES AND SCHULTE, ANDERSON, DOWNES, ARONSON & BITTNER, P.C.’S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS

This case involves a family dispute over the Rupert siblings’ inheritance rights under their parents’ wills and trusts. Plaintiff William Trick Rupert brings this Second Amended Compliant (“SAC”) against a number of Defendants, including two of his siblings, several attorneys, and three law firms, alleging claims under the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (“RICO”) Act, the Oregon RICO Act (“ORICO”), and common law claims for conversion and intentional interference with expected inheritance, arising out of a family dispute regarding the disbursement of his parents’ trust assets. The Defendants 1 can be divided into four groups: (1) the “Sibling Defendants,” including Plaintiffs sister, Susan Bond, and brother, James Rupert; (2) the “Downes Defen-' dants,” including attorney Gile Downes and his law firm, Schulte, Anderson, Downes, Aronson & Bittner, P.C.; (3) the “Zusman Defendants,” including attorney *1149 Edward Zusman and his law firm, Markun Zusman & Compton, LLC; and (4) the “Cartwright…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.