United States of America v. $65,800.00 in US Currency
Plaintiff: United States of America
Defendant: $65,800.00 in US Currency
Case Number: 5:2013cv00451
Filed: March 11, 2013
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: Jesus G. Bernal
Presiding Judge: David T. Bristow
Nature of Suit: Drug Related Seizure of Property

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
November 25, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 40 CONSENT JUDGMENT OF FORFEITURE by Judge Jesus G. Bernal: IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: 1. This Court has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter of this action. 2. Notice of this action has been given in accordance with law. All potential claimants to the defendant currency other than Dillon are deemed to have admitted the allegations of the Complaint. The allegations set out in the Complaint are sufficient to establish a basis for forfeiture. 3. The United States of Ame rica shall have judgment as to the defendant $65,800.00 in U.S. currency and all interest earned of the entirety of the defendant currency since seizure, and no other person or entity shall have any right, title or interest therein. The United States Marshals Service is ordered to dispose of said funds in accordance with law. ( MD JS-6. Case Terminated ) (ad)
August 22, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 31 AMENDED DEFAULT JUDGMENT by Judge Jesus G. Bernal Re Judgment 27 : (see document image for specifics). (ad)
August 20, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 30 AMENDED JUDGMENT 27 by Judge Jesus G. Bernal: IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that default judgment is entered in favor of Plaintiff and against the interests of Tameeka D. Dillon and all other potential claimants, excluding Norma Dillon, in the Defenda nt $65,800.00 in U.S. currency. All right, title, and interest of Tameeka D. Dillon and all other potential claimants, with the exception of Norma Dillon, in and to Defendant $65,800.00 in U.S. currency is condemned and forfeited to the United States of America. The Court orders that such judgment be entered. (ad)
August 13, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 27 JUDGMENT by Judge Jesus G. Bernal, IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that default judgment is entered in favor of Plaintiff and against the interests of Tameeka D. Dillon and all other potential claimants, excluding Norma Dillon, in the Defendant $65,8 00.00 in U.S. currency. The Defendant $65,800.00 in U.S. currency shall be and hereby is forfeited to the United States of America, which shall dispose of the Defendant $65,800.00 in U.S. currency in the manner required by law. Related to: Order on Motion for Default Judgment, 26 . (mrgo)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: United States of America v. $65,800.00 in US Currency
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: United States of America
Represented By: Steven R Welk
Represented By: Jonathan Galatzan
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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: $65,800.00 in US Currency
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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | 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 should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?