24 Cited authorities

Lujan v. Defs. of Wildlife
504 U.S. 555 (1992) Cited 27,751 times 138 Legal Analyses
Holding that the elements of standing "must be supported in the same way as any other matter on which the plaintiff bears the burden of proof"
Allen v. Wright
468 U.S. 737 (1984) Cited 4,750 times 9 Legal Analyses
Holding that, even when plaintiffs allege "one of the most serious injuries recognized in our legal system," it's not justiciable where "the chain of causation between the challenged Government conduct and the asserted injury are far too weak for the chain as a whole to sustain respondents' standing"
Valley Forge College v. Americans United
454 U.S. 464 (1982) Cited 4,968 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that "the psychological consequence presumably produced by observation of conduct with which one disagrees ... is not an injury sufficient to confer standing under Art. III, even though the disagreement is phrased in constitutional terms"
Lefkowitz v. Turley
414 U.S. 70 (1973) Cited 972 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that "if immunity is supplied and testimony is still refused," the courts may compel testimony "by use of civil contempt and coerced imprisonment," and the government may deprive them of employment or impose other punishments
U.S. v. Real Property
545 F.3d 1134 (9th Cir. 2008) Cited 200 times
Holding "that 18 U.S.C. § 983 authorizes district courts to grant ex parte extensions of time in which to file a civil forfeiture complaint."
U.S. v. $191,910.00 in U.S. Currency
16 F.3d 1051 (9th Cir. 1994) Cited 227 times 1 Legal Analyses
Affirming summary judgment in claimant's favor
U.S. v. One Lincoln Navigator 1998
328 F.3d 1011 (8th Cir. 2003) Cited 142 times
Holding that where state law defines the “owner” of a vehicle as “a person who holds the legal title,” such legal title “establishes a prima facie case of ownership,” which, in the circumstances, conferred standing to contest the vehicle's forfeiture
U.S. v. $9,041,598.68
163 F.3d 238 (5th Cir. 1998) Cited 150 times
Holding that a federal district court has the discretionary authority to stay a proceeding "to control the course of litigation"
U.S. v. $148,840.00
521 F.3d 1268 (10th Cir. 2008) Cited 103 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that "at the summary judgment stage, a claimant must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he has a facially colorable interest in the res such that he would be injured if the property were forfeited to the United States"
Perry v. Sheahan
222 F.3d 309 (7th Cir. 2000) Cited 126 times
Holding that seizure of firearms did not meet plain view exception because officers did not have probable cause to believe that items were linked to criminal activity
Rule 33 - Interrogatories to Parties
Fed. R. Civ. P. 33 Cited 10,871 times 21 Legal Analyses
Adopting Rule 30(b)
Section 981 - Civil forfeiture
18 U.S.C. § 981 Cited 3,698 times 33 Legal Analyses
Adopting 19 U.S.C. § 1602 et seq.

United States of America v. Funds in the amount of Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000) et al

24 Cited authorities

Holding that the elements of standing "must be supported in the same way as any other matter on which the plaintiff bears the burden of proof"

Holding that "the psychological consequence presumably produced by observation of conduct with which one disagrees ... is not an injury sufficient to confer standing under Art. III, even though the disagreement is phrased in constitutional terms"

Holding that "if immunity is supplied and testimony is still refused," the courts may compel testimony "by use of civil contempt and coerced imprisonment," and the government may deprive them of employment or impose other punishments

Holding "that 18 U.S.C. § 983 authorizes district courts to grant ex parte extensions of time in which to file a civil forfeiture complaint."

Affirming summary judgment in claimant's favor

Holding that where state law defines the “owner” of a vehicle as “a person who holds the legal title,” such legal title “establishes a prima facie case of ownership,” which, in the circumstances, conferred standing to contest the vehicle's forfeiture

Holding that a federal district court has the discretionary authority to stay a proceeding "to control the course of litigation"

Holding that "at the summary judgment stage, a claimant must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he has a facially colorable interest in the res such that he would be injured if the property were forfeited to the United States"

Holding that seizure of firearms did not meet plain view exception because officers did not have probable cause to believe that items were linked to criminal activity

Adopting Rule 30(b)

Adopting 19 U.S.C. § 1602 et seq.