State Cigarette Tax Evasion RICO Lawsuit Gets Green Light From Manhattan US Judge
In its second amended complaint the city claims the North Carolina wholesale distributor was fully aware cigarettes he was shipping were headed to NYC, making a profit off dodging New York taxes.
May 31, 2019 at 04:02 PM
4 minute read
A Manhattan federal judge on Friday allowed civil racketeering and other charges brought by New York City against a group of transporters and distributors of cigarettes from North Carolina to New York.
The decision was a victory for attorneys from the New York City Law Department who gained success at the third time of asking for their second amended complaint, which accuses the cigarette distributors of evading taxes aimed at lowering tobacco consumption and mitigating the costs of disease caused by smoking.
Civil charges were brought under federal statutes including RICO—or Racketeering-Influenced and Corrupt Organizations.
In a statement provided to the New York Law Journal, New York City Law Department Deputy Chief Eric Proshansky, who leads the city's efforts in the suit, hailed the district court's decision.
“This important decision permits the City to seek damages from out of state cigarette suppliers who knowingly partner with New York-based cigarette bootleggers who evade taxes specifically enacted to curb the rate of smoking,” Proshanksy said.
On two other occasions since the suit was first brought in January 2018, U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer of the Southern District of New York found that the city's complaints against a North Carolina wholesale cigarette distributor, Amjed Hatu, failed to pass muster with the court.
In May 2018, Engelmayer directed the city to file an amended complaint or opposition order, after Hatu, his company and another defendant filed motions to dismiss the initial complaint. A few weeks later, the city complied, filing an amended complaint.
In June, Hatu filed another motion to dismiss, while the remaining non-movant defenders filed answers to the amended complaint. In September, Engelmayer dismissed the city's claims, finding the pleadings failed to sufficiently establish facts that the participants in the alleged scheme knew that what was being shipped from North Carolina was ending up in New York to be distributed illegally. Similarly, under the RICO claims, New York's long-arm statute was unsupported by the inferences drawn from the allegations.
All this changed Friday, when Engelmayer denied Hatu's motion to dismiss the city's second amended complaint, filed in January 2019.
The critical factor for the district court was the inclusion of affidavits of two other alleged co-conspirators, in which they describe numerous conversations with Hatu that provide the city with evidence to overcome Engelmayer's previous concerns.
These conversations, according to the affidavits, included discussions the parties had about the alleged scheme to transport cigarettes taxed in North Carolina at a fraction of the rate of New York's taxes, to specifically be sold for profit based on the margin of difference between the two states' tax rates. The affidavits also include claims that Hatu altered invoices to conceal the “suspiciously high volume of cigarettes he sold” to the middlemen, the district court said.
“The implication is clear, and the circumstantial inference is strong, that Hatu appreciated that the higher New York taxes would not be paid,” Engelmayer noted in his opinion. “These allegations alone provide a strong basis from which to infer that Hatu was aware of the scheme to sell under-taxed cigarettes in New York, and that he knowingly participated in that scheme anticipating financial gain from the sales there of under-taxed cigarettes.”
These findings supported the district court's conclusion that personal jurisdiction was appropriate in the case, and that the RICO claims, as well as federal claims against the defendants under the Contraband Cigarette Trafficking Act and Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking Act, as well as the state claims, to move forward.
Engelmayer set a June 11 deadline for the parties to submit case management proposals for discovery, which he hoped to see end by September.
Bleakley Platt & Schmidt partner William Murphy represents Hatu in the suit. He declined to comment on the district court's decision.
Related:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Final Countdown': SEC Launches Nearly 800% Litigation Surge in October
3 minute readCravath Elevates 7 to Partnership, Up From Last Year
NY District Attorneys Ask for Level Funding Amid Statewide Drop in Violent Crime
Trending Stories
- 1New York’s Equal Rights Amendment Is a Big Deal
- 2Blue-Ribbon Panel Calls for Pay Bumps for NYS Commissioners, But Says No to Lawmakers, Elected Officials
- 3'Outstanding Cooperation': Feds Seek Leniency in Sentencing for Ex-FTX Executive Gary Wang
- 4'Grave Matter of Serious Consequences': Why a Missouri Judge Sanctioned a Top Kirkland & Ellis Attorney
- 5Large Group Leaves DLA Piper Affiliate in Brazil to Form New Firm
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250