United States v. $148,840.00 in United States Currency

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a district court may revisit the issue of standing at later stages of litigation
• holding that district court erred by dismissing forfeiture claimant for lack of standing, because court was required to view evidence in the light most favorable to claimant, the non-moving party
• holding that physical possession of the property at issue at the time of seizure, along with a claim of ownership in the property, is sufficient to establish Article III standing
• holding that “in a civil case a district court may strike conclusory testimony if the witness asserts the Fifth Amendment privilege to avoid answering relevant questions, yet freely responds to questions that are advantageous to his cause.”
• stating that Supplemental Rule C(6) serves as the requirement for statutory standing in a forfeiture action
• determining that claimant had established standing at summary judgment through verified claim and evidence that he had possessed currency found in his rental car

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).