United States of America v. One 2010 River Birch Mobile Home Model No. 3202-1, Serial Number RB09HL15211AB and ALL PARTS

Plaintiff: United States of America
Defendant: One 2010 River Birch Mobile Home Model No. 3202-1, Serial Number RB09HL15211AB and All Parts, Attachments, and Accessions Thereto
Case Number: 4:2013cv00088
Filed: May 1, 2013
Court: Mississippi Southern District Court
Office: Eastern Office
County: Jasper
Referring Judge: F. Keith Ball
Presiding Judge: Daniel P. Jordan
Nature of Suit: Drug Related Seizure of Property
Cause of Action: 21:841 Forfeiture Property-Drugs
Jury Demanded By: Defendant

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 Mississippi Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: United States of America v. One 2010 River Birch Mobile Home Model No. 3202-1, Serial Number RB09HL15211AB and ALL PARTS
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: United States of America
Represented By: E. Carlos Tanner, III
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: One 2010 River Birch Mobile Home Model No. 3202-1, Serial Number RB09HL15211AB and All Parts, Attachments, and Accessions 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 ]

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.