Matschke v. UroPartners, LLC

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that unreasonable delay in filing forfeiture proceedings may violate due process and require return of the property
• holding that an eighteen-month delay “in instituting civil forfeiture proceedings was reasonable” when the plaintiff did not show prejudice caused 15 by the delay
• noting that permitting the government to wait for a decision on an administrative forfeiture action is beneficial to the claimant, government, and court system
• noting that because investigating officials normally can make determination quickly, an investigation alone normally will only rarely justify a lengthy delay
• recognizing that forfeiture is a part of the sentence
• finding that due process requires court to consider several factors in determining whether government initiated forfeiture action within reasonable time

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).