H & Q Props, Inc. v. Doll, No. 14-2811 (8th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this CaseH & Q and the Doll Companies owned membership units of Double D Excavating, LLC. The Doll Companies opened account 121224 in the name of "Double D Excavating" and deposited a check payable to the LLC and opened account 119992 in the name of David Doll. The Doll Companies deposited into Account 121224 multiple payments that LLC customers made to the LLC and then transferred funds from Account 121224 to Account 119992, commingled funds from Account 119992 with funds belonging to the Doll Companies, and used those funds to pay Doll Companies' expenses. H&Q claims that the Doll Companies failed to give notice or obtain consent for any of those activities and represented to H&Q that the LLC was struggling financially and needed additional financial assistance. The Doll Companies contributed a portion of the funds from Account 119992 back to the LLC and, according to H&Q, represented to H&Q that these were fresh capital contributions. H&Q also invested additional capital. After discovering the Doll Companies' alleged conduct, H&Q filed suit asserting state law claims and claims under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, 18 U.S.C. 1961. The Eighth Circuit affirmed dismissal, agreeing that the complaint did not sufficiently allege any racketeering activity.
Court Description: Smith, Author, with Wollman and Benton, Circuit Judges] Civil case - RICO. Plaintiffs failed to allege that defendants defraud Malvern Bank or engaged in the requisite false or fraudulent activities to obtain bank property within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1344, and the district court did not err in finding that plaintiff failed to adequately allege bank fraud; similarly, plaintiffs failed to adequately allege wire and mail fraud; no error in denying plaintiffs' motion for leave to amend as the proposed amendments did not cure the defects in plaintiffs' RICO allegations.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.