Jorge Sarit and Dennie Espaillat v. U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that federal forfeiture statutes generally provide adequate legal remedies for claimants challenging sufficiency of notice to forfeiture proceedings and thus preclude review under the APA
• “Only an express waiver will give a court jurisdiction to hear a claim against the United States”
• “Courts are endowed with inherent powers which are necessary to the 13 conduct of their business, including the power to sanction.”
• “[CJourts have entertained challenges to the adequacy of notice, reasoning that the mechanism [for obtaining judicial relief] is not available to a plaintiff who is not properly notified of the pending forfeiture.”
• “most challenges to forfeiture would be foreclosed by a plaintiffs’ failure to utilize the mechanism for obtaining judicial relief provided in the forfeiture statute and regulations”
• absent exceptional circumstances, mailing notice to the address from which property is seized after notifying claimant's counsel that forfeiture proceeding would ensue is sufficient, despite the government's later discovery that mailed notice was ineffective

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).