BarbriSFCourseDetails
  1. keyboard_arrow_leftBack

Course Details

Course Information
  • smart_display Format

    Live Online with Live Q&A

  • signal_cellular_alt Difficulty Level

    Intermediate

  • work Practice Area

    Personal Injury and Med Mal

Date & Time
  • event Date

    Tuesday, August 5, 2025

  • schedule Time

    1:00 p.m. ET./10:00 a.m. PT

  • timer Program Length

    90 minutes

Credit Information

  • This 90-minute webinar is eligible in most states for 1.5 CLE credits.

$197.00

This course is $0 with these passes:

CLE
ALL

This CLE webinar will explore the practical impact on personal injury litigation strategies from Medical Marijuana Inc. v. Horn, 605 U.S. ___ (2025), holding that "a plaintiff may seek treble damages for business or property loss even if the loss resulted from a personal injury." The panel will discuss if or how the Supreme Court paved the way to RICO claims arising from personal injuries, who might benefit from this, and what types of cases would be most compelling.

Faculty

James G. Perry
Senior Trial Counsel
Atticus Injury Law, PC

Mr. Perry is a trial and litigation attorney with Atticus Injury Law, PC, with a focus on personal injury and products liability matters. He is a former homicide prosecutor, who now handles catastrophic injury, wrongful death, government liability, premises liability, and defective medical devices and commercial products cases, among other areas. Mr. Perry also spends a great deal of time writing about and speaking on traumatic brain injuries and related neurocognitive issues. At his core, he is trial attorney, with over fifty jury trials completed, who serves as a Trial Coach for his alma matter, Berkeley Law School.

expand_circle_down Expand to View Full Bio expand_circle_up Collapse Bio
Michael G. Freedman
Managing Partner
The Freedman Firm

Mr. Freedman, Managing Partner and Founder of the Freedman Firm PC, is an experienced trial attorney and former federal prosecutor who represents individuals and companies nationwide against all types of criminal charges and in high-stakes civil litigation and appeals. He has tried 16 cases to verdict, in a wide variety of federal criminal cases as well as civil disputes and arbitrations. Mr. Freedman has established himself as a go-to defense attorney for clients facing any type of criminal or regulatory charge nationwide and has been named one of the Top White Collar Lawyers in California for the last two years.


He has been equally successful in beating criminal and regulatory charges before trial, preventing them from being filed, and obtaining favorable outcomes at sentencing. Mr. Freedman routinely obtains successful results against the U.S. Department of Justice, the SEC, the California Attorney’s General Office, and numerous district attorney’s offices. In his civil practice, he tries complex disputes on behalf of individuals and corporations, and his experience ranges from defeating multi-million dollar claims against publicly traded companies to winning millions of dollars for his clients.


His clients, who often include executives, doctors, lawyers, celebrities, politicians and government officials, entrepreneurs, and cannabis companies, benefit from his courtroom skills, strategic guidance, and ability to discreetly navigate and successfully resolve the most challenging matters.

expand_circle_down Expand to View Full Bio expand_circle_up Collapse Bio

Description

The federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) statute creates a private cause of action (and treble damages) for injuries to a person's business or property caused by racketeering activity. RICO does not authorize a private cause of action, however, for personal injuries caused by racketeering. The issue in Horn was what happens if racketeering causes personal injury which in turn results in a loss to the plaintiff's business or property: can a person assert a RICO claim and seek treble damages for the ensuing property or business damage? The answer is maybe, but it’s complicated.

The defense bar and the dissent in Horn fear that this decision opens the door to RICO claims arising from personal injuries, theoretically allowing plaintiffs to turn garden-variety personal injury claims into suits for treble damages. However, the majority pointed out that the RICO statute's strict requirements—e.g., “by reason of,” “pattern of racketeering activity” and particular injury— would prevent such an outcome and then highlighted crucial issues that had been left undecided.

Nonetheless, personal injury lawyers, as well as those who practice RICO law generally, on both sides will want to carefully consider what fact patterns might give rise to a viable RICO claim and who other than plaintiffs might be interested in leveraging the holding.

Listen as this esteemed panel reviews the Horn decision and its possible implications for business and property damages arising from personal injuries. 

Outline

I. The decision

II. The dissent

III. Potential litigation strategies

IV. Litigation hurdles

V. Examples and Circuit Court Decisions

Benefits

The panel will consider these and other key issues: 

  • Could the Horn rationale assist subrogees?
  • How is a single tortious act defined for purposes of RICO?
  • What types of fact patterns could most likely give rise to RICO claims?
  • What amounts to “by reason of” under RICO for purposes of PI injuries?
  • How does “pattern of racketeering activity” limits application of RICO in PI cases?
  • What is the definition of the phrase "injured in his business or property" in civil RICO §1964(c)?