Given the broad scope of conduct often asserted in a civil action under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO),1 a RICO claim frequently involves timeliness issues. While RICO does not provide a statute of limitations for its civil enforcement provisions, the Supreme Court has held that civil RICO claims are subject to a four-year limitations period.2 An important determination in applying that time period is when the clock beginsthat is, when does the claim accrue?
Particularly because the predicate acts and racketeering activity underlying a RICO violation may be far-ranging and multi-faceted, precisely when the claim accrues can be fact intensive and, perhaps, murky. And when the plaintiff knows, or should know, that the claim has accrued so as to trigger the statute of limitations is an important issue. A recent U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit decision, Koch v. Christie’s Int’l,3 addressed these issues. The court both clarified the operation of “inquiry notice” that can trigger the running of the statute of limitations in a RICO context and gave a road map for assessing timeliness based on inquiry notice for cases more generally.
