United States v. $154,853.00 in U.S. 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 the district court abused its discretion in striking a claim for sole reason that claimant failed adequately to respond to G(6) special interrogatories
• observing that the purpose of Rule G(6)(a) “is to permit the government to file limited interrogatories at any time after the claim is filed to gather information that bears on the claimant’s standing”
• observing that the purpose of Rule G(6)(a) “is to permit the government to file limited interrogatories at any time after the claim is filed to gather information that bears on the claimant’s standing”
• finding that, where a claim is “sufficient to state a colorable ‘ownership interest,’” “the district court abused its discretion in striking [the claim] for failure to adequately respond to the special interrogatories”
• observing that the claimant “would certainly have an ownership interest in earned income”
• reversing district court's striking of claim for noncompliance with same procedural requirements where SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 19 (OJ 47A claimant \had adequately claimed to have earned the defendant funds through legitimate employment\)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).