Hickman v. Taylor
329 U.S. 495 (1947) Cited 6,552 times 31 Legal AnalysesHolding in the context of the work product privilege that the adversary system requires a party's attorney be permitted to “assemble information, sift what he considers to be the relevant from the irrelevant facts, prepare his legal theories and plan his strategy without undue and needless interference”
Serrano v. Cintas Corp.
699 F.3d 884 (6th Cir. 2013) Cited 270 times 5 Legal AnalysesHolding that EEOC satisfied its pre-suit requirement to attempt to conciliate class claims by “provid[ing] notice to Cintas that it was investigating class-wide instances of discrimination”
U.S. v. Real Property
545 F.3d 1134 (9th Cir. 2008) Cited 203 timesHolding "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. Exacto
166 F.3d 522 (2d Cir. 1999) Cited 154 timesHolding that standing is a "threshold question in every federal case," including civil forfeiture actions
United States v. a Single Family Residence
803 F.2d 625 (11th Cir. 1986) Cited 170 timesDetermining probable cause from testimony at trial
Martinez v. Trainor
556 F.2d 818 (7th Cir. 1977) Cited 192 timesFinding that defendant's Rule 59(e) motion "failed to state even one ground for granting the motion and thus failed to meet the minimal standard of 'reasonable specification'"
United States v. All Assets Held at Bank Julius Baer & Co. (In re Rem)
959 F. Supp. 2d 81 (D.D.C. 2013) Cited 38 timesExplaining that the claimant bears the burden of establishing standing in a civil forfeiture action
U.S. v. Exxon Corporation
94 F.R.D. 250 (D.D.C. 1981) Cited 67 timesIn Exxon, as here, "the purpose of discovery was to ascertain whether one party acted in reliance on the representations of the other party," and the issue of reliance — whether good faith (as in Exxon), actual, justifiable or reasonable — "necessarily turns upon the subjective intention of the party claiming reliance and, therefore, demands investigation into [those] attorney-client communications [in which] such an intention would be manifested."
Kelly v. Lockheed Martin Services Group
25 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D.P.R. 1998) Cited 30 times 3 Legal AnalysesExplaining federal enclave “analysis considers whether either the state law existed at the time of cession and has not been abrogated by Congress, whether a relevant predecessor state law existed, or whether Congress has specifically acted to make state law applicable on the enclave”
United States v. Real Property & Improvements
928 F.2d 373 (11th Cir. 1991) Cited 34 timesFinding a claimant in a civil forfeiture case had more than bare legal title to a property even though she permitted her son, the defendant, to live rent-free
Rule 26 - Duty to Disclose; General Provisions Governing Discovery
Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 Cited 97,825 times 674 Legal AnalysesAdopting Fed.R.Civ.P. 37
Rule 7 - Pleadings Allowed; Form of Motions and Other Papers
Fed. R. Civ. P. 7 Cited 7,742 times 2 Legal AnalysesDefining "pleadings" for purposes of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
Section 981 - Civil forfeiture
18 U.S.C. § 981 Cited 3,794 times 33 Legal AnalysesAdopting 19 U.S.C. § 1602 et seq.
Section 983 - General rules for civil forfeiture proceedings
18 U.S.C. § 983 Cited 2,832 times 8 Legal AnalysesNoting that for purposes of the innocent owner defense to civil forfeiture, "no person may assert an ownership interest under this subsection in contraband or other property that it is illegal to possess"
Section 984 - Civil forfeiture of fungible property
18 U.S.C. § 984 Cited 136 times 3 Legal AnalysesOmitting the provision requiring a post-seizure pretrial hearing when fungible property is seized