the alleged fraud would not make an otherwise properly pleaded claim worthy of sanctions. It is not settled law that RICO offenses must be economically motivated. See McMonagle v. Northeast Women’s Center, Inc., 493 U.S. 901, 110 S.Ct. 261, 107 L.Ed.2d 210 (1989) (White, J. dissenting) (noting split among circuits concerning whether RICO liability may be imposed where neither the enterprise nor the pattern of racketeering activity had any profitmaking element). Finally, we note that if the plotters, for reasons other than surgical competence, used the pretext of peer review to lull Smith into not resisting the efforts to fire him, that, too, could be part of the fraud underlying the RICO offense. See, e.g., Landry v. Air Line Pilots Ass’n Int’l, AFL-CIO, 901 F.2d 404, 429 (5th Cir.) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 111 S.Ct. 244, 112
recognizing puerto rico law creates substantive claim against liability insurer distinct from claim against insured recognizing that in pari delicto is a defense to rico claims recognizing lulling in rico claim recognizing such a claim under  1983 recognizing that a texas common law claim for retaliatory discharge is a claim sounding in tort