United States v. Lolita Mondragon, Claimant-Appellant, and $500,684 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.

• finding that the sum, unusual packaging in sealed plastic bags, and drug dog alert on money constituted sufficient indicia of criminality to survive motion to dismiss
• finding that the packaging of a large sum of cash, a hidden compartment where the cash was located in a vehicle, and the alert of narcotics by a K–9 were sufficient to deny claimant's motion to dismiss
• stating the purpose of a civil forfeiture complaint is to allow claimants to “commence an investigation of the facts and to frame a responsive pleading”
• contending the Complaint did “nothing more than illustrate thfat] Odebrecht privately donated to campaign financing”
• affirming denial of motion to strike the complaint where complaint lacked information about the drug transactions giving rise to the seized cash
• discussing Rule E(2)’s “heightened particularity in pleading requirement” and collecting cases

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).