ILNews

Lawyers ask for $3 or $109 million in RICO case

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A federal judge is being asked to impose damages ranging anywhere from $3 to $109 million in a landmark racketeering suit.

Those amounts came Monday in the findings of fact and conclusions of law, which U.S. District Senior Judge James Moody in Hammond had asked both sides to submit following a full-day hearing June 9.

Now, Senior Judge Moody will decide how to proceed on the damages award and request for relief. He hasn't set any court proceedings or announced when that decision may happen, but the filings in the Northern District of Indiana leave him with options.

With that monetary debate, a new player is trying to get involved in the 2004 civil racketeering case: the Foundations of East Chicago, a non-profit corporation that receives a portion of the East Chicago riverboat casino monies. The organization filed a motion with the court Monday to intervene, with attorneys for Indianapolis-based Barnes & Thornburg entering an appearance. Specifically, the Foundations of East Chicago is countering a key aspect of what the Indiana Attorney General's Office is going after - casino revenue money filtered through that organization by former Mayor Robert Pastrick, who used it for his own personal and political purposes.

While the 2004 case mostly centers on the $25 million of public money used to get votes for the 1999 primary election for Pastrick and his top aides, it also targets casino revenue money that the political machine is accused of misspending during the final years of Pastrick's 32-year reign.

Attorney General Greg Zoeller wants the judge to look beyond the monetary award and impose other relief allowed by the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization (RICO) Act, specifically a state-supervised forensic audit of East Chicago finances and those casino funds.

According to the proposed findings filed, the state says that actual damages total $32,187,242, an amount that includes $1.6 million in fees paid to defense lawyers of a dozen city officials who've been convicted on federal criminal charges in the Sidewalk Six case. With treble damages, the amount would total $96.5 million - pre-judgment interest from the date the suit was filed in 2004 would boost that amount to nearly $109 million.

But Pastrick's attorney, Michael Bosch with Bosch & Dedelow in Highland, said the state failed to make its case, hasn't proved the damages it is trying to recover, and is wrongly going after the East Chicago casino organizations that aren't parties in this case.

Echoing a claim made during closing arguments at the June 9 hearing, Bosch wrote in his proposed conclusion that, "Based on the Plaintiff's utter lack of proof, or offer of good proof, this Court cannot award anything other than nominal damages" and should award them $1, or $3 if tripled by treble damages statute.

Arguing that the casino foundation isn't a party in this case, the organization's attorneys' 13-page motion asks the court to deny any state-supervised forensic audit that may involve that organization.

The brief states there's no legal basis for including Foundations and that the state is barred from seeking relief as it may relate to the casino organization.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. KUDOS to the Indiana Supreme Court for realizing that some bureacracies need to go to the stake. Recall what RWR said: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" NOW ... what next to this rare and inspiring chopping block? Well, the Commission on Gender and Race (but not religion!?!) is way overdue. And some other Board's could be cut with a positive for State and the reputation of the Indiana judiciary.

  2. During a visit where an informant with police wears audio and video, does the video necessary have to show hand to hand transaction of money and narcotics?

  3. I will agree with that as soon as law schools stop lying to prospective students about salaries and employment opportunities in the legal profession. There is no defense to the fraudulent numbers first year salaries they post to mislead people into going to law school.

  4. The sad thing is that no fish were thrown overboard The "greenhorn" who had never fished before those 5 days was interrogated for over 4 hours by 5 officers until his statement was illicited, "I don't want to go to prison....." The truth is that these fish were measured frozen off shore and thawed on shore. The FWC (state) officer did not know fish shrink, so the only reason that these fish could be bigger was a swap. There is no difference between a 19 1/2 fish or 19 3/4 fish, short fish is short fish, the ticket was written. In addition the FWC officer testified at trial, he does not measure fish in accordance with federal law. There was a document prepared by the FWC expert that said yes, fish shrink and if these had been measured correctly they averaged over 20 inches (offshore frozen). This was a smoke and mirror prosecution.

  5. I love this, Dave! Many congrats to you! We've come a long way from studying for the bar together! :)

ADVERTISEMENT