Rabinowitz provides a good example of how such cases were handled in the pre-RICO era. Before RICO, manufacturers were seldom successfully prosecuted under the criminal laws of mail or wire fraud. But they were made to people who had seen the machines and could presumably know their own capabilities. That both salesmen and purchasers were mistaken as to this does not spell out an intent to deceive. After the passage of RICO, the line between permissible sales puffery and fraud became less clear.
Sales talk exaggerations, can constitute mail or wire fraud.
The defendants then returned to their home state and distributed the beer to retail vendors, thereby reducing the sales of the Anheuser-Busch distributor in their home state. The unauthorized distributor billed and was paid by mail. The defendants argued that they cold not be held liable under RICO because there was no evidence that the home state distributor ever relied upon or even received the allegedly fraudulent invoices or checks. Firestone provides a good example of when a plaintiff stands too remote from a RICO violation to recover under RICO s proximate cause standard. In Firestone, the plaintiffs wealthy grandmother bequeathed her residuary estate to a Family Trust established by the plaintiffs grandfather.