RICO Reform Act of 1989

RICO Reform Act of 1989 - Amends the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) to include additional predicate offenses within the definition of "racketeering activity," such as prostitution involving minors, computer fraud, and certain activity relating to terrorist acts abroad.

Modifies civil remedies provisions of RICO to require U.S. district courts to find proof by a preponderance of the evidence before restraining violations.

Authorizes: (1) specified governmental entities whose business or property is injured by conduct in violation of RICO to recover threefold the actual damages to such business or property, plus costs; (2) persons whose business or property is injured by such conduct to recover actual damages, plus costs (and punitive damages of up to twice the actual damages where the plaintiff proves by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant's actions were consciously malicious, or so egregious and deliberate that malice may be implied); (3) such persons to recover threefold the actual damages if any defendant has been convicted of specified Federal or State offenses; and (4) natural persons who suffer serious bodily injury by reason of specified crimes of violence to recover actual damages to such person's business or property, damages sustained by such individual as allowed under State law (excluding pain and suffering), and costs (and, upon proof by clear and convincing evidence that defendant's actions were malicious, up to twice the actual damages). (Current law allows recovery of threefold the damages, plus costs, for persons whose business or property is injured.)

Sets forth: (1) statutes of limitation; and (2) procedures for considering affirmative defenses.

Permits international service of process. (Current law restricts such service to specified judicial districts within the United States.)

Provides for exclusive Federal jurisdiction to hear criminal or civil RICO proceedings.

Authorizes recovery beyond actual damages to a person's business or property, where such person would not otherwise be eligible to recover costs under this Act, under specified conditions, including where the judge determines that a limitation of recovery would clearly be unjust.