United States v. James Lippert

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 “defendant’s ability to pay is a factor un- der the Excessive Fines Clause”
• holding penalty may be punitive under Excessive Fines Clause but not punishment for double jeopardy purposes
• observing, in conducting an Excessive Fines Clause analysis of an award under § 55(a)(1), that the district court declined to permit recovery beyond double damages
• interpreting provisions of the Anti-Kickback Act that provide for civil damages and fines and holding such provisions not violative of Fifth Amendment
• discussing the importance of legislative distinction between civil and criminal penalties for double jeopardy purposes
• “[I]n the case of fines, as opposed to forfeitures, the defendant’s ability to pay is a factor under the Excessive Fines Clause.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).