Supreme Court Report

Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

General Motors, LLC, et al. v. FCA US, LLC, et al.

Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, No. 20-1791 · judgment August 11, 2022


Certiorari denied · April 17, 2023
Pre-decision estimate: 16% cert probability (95% interval 10%–24%)

Before the decision, about 3.9× the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for counsel who has won certiorari before, a circuit split argued in the petition, and a dissent in the court below (flagged in the petition), and down for a business respondent.

Question presented

The defendants in this case (collectively, “FCA”) illicitly funneled millions of dollars to officers of the labor union they share with General Motors (“GM”). That is an undeniable fact backed by multiple criminal pleas by FCA and the union. FCA did so not just to decrease its own labor costs and to obtain preferential work rules, but for the specific purpose of increasing GM’s labor costs and imposing constraints to pressure GM to merge with FCA. The Sixth Circuit acknowledged that GM plausibly alleged that it was the intended target of that racketeering scheme and that GM was harmed in fact. But the court nevertheless held that GM could not proceed past the motion-to-dismiss stage under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (“RICO”) Act because the scheme corrupted the union to harm GM and aspects of the scheme required the approval of GM workers. The court reached this counterintuitive conclusion that the intended victim of a RICO conspiracy could not sue despite this Court’s teaching that “[o]ne who intentionally causes injury to another is subject to liability” under RICO “to the other for that injury,” Bridge v. Phoenix Bond & Indem. Co., 553 U.S. 639, 657 (2008), and even though multiple other circuits have allowed the intended victims of RICO conspiracies to sue in comparable circumstances. The question presented is: Whether the direct and intended victim of a racketeering scheme who suffers injury by reason of the scheme is precluded from establishing proximate cause under RICO if the scheme by design involved the corruption or deceit of other parties.

Counsel of record

For petitioner
Paul D. Clement
Clement & Murphy, PLLC

For respondent
Michael A. Nedelman
Nedelman Legal Group, PLLC

Case

Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference

Linked docket
22A353

Proceedings

  1. Apr 17 2023
    Petition DENIED.
  2. Mar 29 2023
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/14/2023.
  3. Mar 29 2023
    Reply of petitioners General Motors LLC, et al. filed. (Distributed)
  4. Mar 13 2023
    Brief of respondents FCA US, LLC, et al. in opposition filed.
  5. Feb 27 2023
    Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted in part and the time is extended to and including March 13, 2023.
  6. Jan 19 2023
    Motion to extend the time to file a response from February 20, 2023 to March 20, 2023, submitted to The Clerk. (Motion docketed 2/27/23)
  7. Jan 12 2023
    Motion to extend the time to file a response from February 10, 2023 to March 13, 2023, submitted to The Clerk.
  8. Jan 12 2023
    Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including March 13, 2023.
  9. Jan 09 2023
    Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due February 10, 2023)
  10. Nov 28 2022
    Application (22A353) granted by Justice Kavanaugh extending the time to file until January 8, 2023.
  11. Nov 21 2022
    Application (22A353) to extend further the time from December 9, 2022 to January 8, 2023, submitted to Justice Kavanaugh.
  12. Oct 27 2022
    Application (22A353) granted by Justice Kavanaugh extending the time to file until December 9, 2022.
  13. Oct 25 2022
    Application (22A353) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from November 9, 2022 to December 9, 2022, submitted to Justice Kavanaugh.