Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/529bv.pdf
Page Number: 575.0

529US2

Unit: $U51

[09-26-01 10:31:04] PAGES PGT: OPIN

500

BECK v. PRUPIS

Opinion of the Court

We granted certiorari, 526 U. S. 1158 (1999), to resolve a
conﬂict among the Courts of Appeals on the question
whether a person injured by an overt act in furtherance of a
conspiracy may assert a civil RICO conspiracy claim under
§ 1964(c) for a violation of § 1962(d) even if the overt act does
not constitute “racketeering activity.” The majority of the
Circuits to consider this question have answered it in the
negative. See, e. g., Bowman v. Western Auto Supply Co.,
985 F. 2d 383, 388 (CA8), cert. denied, 508 U. S. 957 (1993);
Miranda v. Ponce Fed. Bank, 948 F. 2d 41, 48 (CA1 1991);
Reddy v. Litton Indus., Inc., 912 F. 2d 291, 294–295 (CA9
1990), cert. denied, 502 U. S. 921 (1991); Hecht v. Commerce
Clearing House, Inc., 897 F. 2d 21, 25 (CA2 1990). Other
Circuits have allowed RICO conspiracy claims where the
overt act was, as in the instant case, merely the termina-
tion of employment, and was not, therefore, racketeering
activity. See, e. g., Khurana v. Innovative Health Care
Systems, Inc., 130 F. 3d 143, 153–154 (CA5 1997), vacated
sub nom. Teel v. Khurana, 525 U. S. 979 (1998); Schiffels
v. Kemper Financial Services, Inc., 978 F. 2d 344, 348–
349 (CA7 1992); Shearin v. E. F. Hutton Group, Inc., 885
F. 2d 1162, 1168–1169 (CA3 1989).

II

This case turns on the combined effect of two provisions
of RICO that, read in conjunction, provide a civil cause of
action for conspiracy. Section 1964(c) states that a cause of
. by reason of a
action is available to anyone “injured . .
violation of section 1962.” Section 1962(d) makes it unlawful
for a person “to conspire to violate any of the provisions of
subsection (a), (b), or (c) of this section.” To determine what
it means to be “injured . . . by reason of ” a “conspir[acy],”
we turn to the well-established common law of civil conspir-
acy. As we have said, when Congress uses language with a
settled meaning at common law, Congress