Mendoza v. Zirkle Fruit Co.

No. 01-35276 (9th Cir. Sept. 3, 2002) ; Clearinghouse Number: 54883

Description

Agricultural Workers Have Standing to Bring RICO Claim Against Growers for Conspiring to Keep Their Wages Low

Abstract

The Ninth Circuit has held that plaintiff agricultural workers have standing to sue their employers, whom they allege depressed their salaries by conspiring to hire undocumented workers at below-market wages. Plaintiffs are legally authorized to work in the United States. They allege that defendant employers knowingly hired illegal workers because the illegal workers were willing to accept wages that are significantly lower than wages would be in a labor market comprised solely of legally authorized workers. The district court dismissed plaintiffs’ complaint, finding that, although plaintiffs had pled a direct injury, the damages were too speculative and difficult to ascertain. The court noted that intervening factors, such as the wages paid by other orchards in the area, the skill and qualifications of each plaintiff, and the profitability of defendants’ businesses could account for plaintiffs’ depressed wages. Reversing, the court of appeals held that plaintiffs have standing to sue their employers under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO). The court found that the district court’s analysis focused primarily on cause-in-fact, not proximate cause, and it is inappropriate at this state to substitute speculation for the complaint’s allegations of causation. The court held that plaintiffs must be allowed to make their case through presentation of evidence, including experts who will testify about the labor market, the geographic market, and the effects of the illegal scheme.

Additional Information

Attorney Information
Docket Date
2002-09-03 00:00:00+00:00

Files

Filed under: