4 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 22 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from No. 98-56138.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | No. 98-56138 Anchor | green | “to establish a violation of section 1962(d), plaintiffs must allege either an agreement that is a substantive violation of rico or that the defendants agreed to commit, or participated in, a violation of two predicate offenses.” | 8 |
| 2 | No. 98-56138 | green | “either an agreement that is a substantive violation of rico or that the defendants agreed to commit, or participated in, a violation of two predicate offenses.” | 5 |
| 3 | Oki Semiconductor Company, an Operating Group of Oki America Inc, a Delaware Corp. v. Wells Fargo Bank, National Association | green | “the illegal agreement need not be express as long as its existence can be inferred from the words, actions, or interdependence of activities and persons involved.” | 5 |
| 4 | Hannelore Baumer v. James P. Pachl and Gordon L. Yow | green | “the failure to adequately plead a substantive violation of rico precludes a claim for conspiracy.” | 4 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.