USA v. $6,976,934.65

Plaintiff - Appellee: United States of America
Defendant - Appellee: $6,976,934.65, Plus interest deposited into Royal Bank of Scotland International, Account number 2029-56141070, held in the name of Soulbury Limited, and Property Traceable Thereto
Claimant - Appellant: Soulbury Limited
Case Number: 07-5383
Filed: November 28, 2007
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit
Nature of Suit: Oth Forfeiture and Penalty Suits

Opinions

We have the following opinions for this case:

Date FiledDescription
January 27, 2009 USA v. $6,976,934.65
Search for this case: USA v. $6,976,934.65
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff - appellee: United States of America
Represented By: Addy Jacob de Kluiver
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant - appellee: $6,976,934.65, Plus interest deposited into Royal Bank of Scotland International, Account number 2029-56141070, held in the name of Soulbury Limited, and Property Traceable Thereto
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Claimant - appellant: Soulbury Limited
Represented By: Juan Chardiet
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets were retrieved from PACER, and should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.