Epperson v. Schoenberger

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• affirming district court order granting motion to strike appellant’s claim (filed 13 days late) and answer (filed 6 days late) and denying motion for extension of time
• although not invoking the term “statutory standing,” holding that a party “lacked standing to contest the forfeiture” because he had failed to file a timely claim in accordance with Rule C(6)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).