United States Third Circuit

In the context of restitution and the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act (MVRA), where the government demonstrates that a business transaction was consummated due to fraud by the defendant, a commonsense, but rebuttable inference arises that subsequent losses suffered by the victim of the fraud are sufficiently linked to the underlying fraud to support an award of restitution.

Appellate Information

• Argued 07/12/2005
• Decided 12/12/2006
• Published 12/12/2006

Judges

• Before SLOVITER, McKEE and ROSENN, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Third Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Robert Epstein (Argued), Assistant Federal Defender, David L. McColgin, Supervising Appellate Attorney, Maureen Kearney Rowley, Chief Federal Defender, Federal Court Division, Defender Association of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA, Attorneys for Appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Patrick L. Meehan, United States Attorney, Laurie Magid, Deputy United States Attorney, for Policy and Appeals, Robert A. Zauzmer, Assistant United States Attorney, Senior Appellate Counsel, David Farnham (Argued), Trial Attorney, United States Department of Justice, Philadelphia, PA, Attorneys for Appellee.