RICO Redux in STL

After Judge Divine’s fury, Matt Grant drops wild claims, fights on with leaner Family Court RICO case.

NOTE: Watch the full coverage on The Unknown Podcast available on YouTube and Rumble.

By Rick La Rivière with Michael Volpe and Richard Luthmann

Torched by Judge, RICO Lawsuit Rises from Ashes

Matt Grant, a St. Louis attorney and father, has refiled his landmark civil RICO lawsuit against the local family court, hoping a dramatically revised complaint can save his case. In August, Grant’s original 170-page filing accused judges, lawyers – even his ex-wife – of running the “largest criminal courthouse corruption scheme” in Missouri history.

U.S. District Judge Joshua M. Divine took a flamethrower to those ambitions, slamming the sprawling complaint as “plainly deficient many times over” and suggesting it was filed “for an unlawful…vindictive purpose.” His show-cause order noted the bombastic filing crammed in 790 allegations and 21 counts – far from the “short and plain” statement required by Rule 8.

Divine highlighted fundamental errors: Grant sued the State of Missouri (barred by sovereign immunity) and even demanded federal courts remove and disbar state judges – relief beyond any court’s power. The judge doubted the 100-defendant RICO barrage served any proper purpose.

He gave Grant an ultimatum: by September 15, radically cut down the complaint or face dismissal and possible sanctions. Grant’s “landmark” case was suddenly on life support.

Beating the deadline, Grant submitted an amended RICO complaint in the U.S. District Court for Eastern Missouri (St. Louis) on September 15. The new version clocks in at 81 pages (plus exhibits) and strips out some of the most controversial elements. Grant continues to portray a “shadow network” of family court insiders conspiring against him – a criminal enterprise he says extorts parents for money and power.

Notably, Grant dropped the State of Missouri and other immune parties as defendants. He abandoned demands to purge judges from the bench, focusing instead on forward-looking relief. The amended filing explicitly states that “Plaintiffs have not asked this Court to disbar anyone” and that it does not seek to halt the ongoing state custody case (so the federal Anti-Injunction Act “is inapplicable”).

In short, Grant narrowed his sights – seeking prospective relief for an alleged “criminal enterprise” in St. Louis family court while sidestepping the jurisdictional tripwires that nearly sank his case.

Now the question is whether these tweaks will satisfy the court – or if Grant’s crusade will still be tossed out.

RICO Redux in STL – Luthmann: ‘Over the Hurdle’ – Case May Reach Discovery

Richard Luthmann argues the revised complaint clears the plausibility hurdle enough to reach discovery.

Co-host of The Unknown Podcast and outspoken legal commentator Luthmann actually helped expose flaws in Grant’s original suit – but he now believes the revamped complaint might survive.

“I think that he made a substantial effort to… amend out a lot of the parties that were at issue. He amended out the State of Missouri… some of the crazy stuff… That’s gone now,” Luthmann said, praising Grant’s course correction.

The new complaint’s first pages methodically list parties, lay out jurisdiction, and tighten the allegations to meet federal pleading standards. By removing immunized targets and wild relief requests (like ousting judges from the bench), Grant may have given his case a fighting chance.

Luthmann says the key question now is plausibility. Judge Divine will scrutinize whether, assuming all Grant’s allegations are true, the complaint “assert[s] a plausible claim for relief.”

On that front, Luthmann is optimistic. Because Grant “recasted” the lawsuit with more focus and specifics, “he’s over that hurdle… enough, I think, on a lot of these to state a plausible claim,” Luthmann explained.

He predicts the case will “get at least to discovery” – meaning Grant could finally probe the family court’s inner workings through evidence. If that happens, it would mark a dramatic turnaround for a lawsuit nearly thrown out just weeks ago.

Luthmann acknowledges the amended complaint isn’t perfect, but in his view it’s a substantial improvement.

“There’ll be motions to dismiss… but I think this is gonna get at least to discovery,” he said, betting that Grant’s revisions have nudged the once-doomed case past its existential peril.

RICO Redux in STL – Volpe: Complaint ‘Still Garbage’ and Headed for Dismissal

Not everyone is convinced. Michael Volpe – an investigative journalist who co-hosts The Unknown Podcast with Luthmann – remains deeply skeptical of Grant’s changes.

Volpe bluntly calls the amended complaint “a garbage lawsuit that’s going to be dismissed”, arguing that Grant “didn’t really fix it” at all.

Judge Divine’s chief gripe was the length and incoherence, Volpe notes, and “he didn’t make it any shorter.” The revised filing still runs nearly 185 pages including exhibits, and Volpe suspects the judge “is not gonna be happy with this amended lawsuit.” In Volpe’s eyes, Grant’s new pleading remains a doomed repeat.

“I think Judge Divine is going to dismiss this lawsuit,” he said on-air.

Beyond form, Volpe attacks the substance.

“He still doesn’t have the factual basis to argue RICO,” Volpe contends, pointing to one supposedly “damning” email from eight years ago that “shows no evidence of a RICO enterprise” in Grant’s case.

To Volpe, Grant’s grand “Family Court Mafia” narrative still reads like a conspiracy theory short on concrete proof.

While Luthmann sees a plausible (if imperfect) RICO case emerging, Volpe insists nothing material has changed. Volpe even suggests Grant’s half-measure fix may only further anger the judge.

“This is much worse…you’ve done almost nothing,” he said of the do-over.

In his estimation, the lawsuit remains dead on arrival. “

If it gets to discovery, that’s [expletive] huge,” Volpe conceded, “but I don’t think it’s gonna get to discovery.”

In this war of words, Grant’s legal saga now teeters between two outcomes: a hard-fought breakthrough or a spectacular flame-out – with the next move up to the federal court.