United States of America v. $264.70 U.S. Currency et al

Plaintiff: United States of America
Defendant: $264.70 U.S. Currency and Toshiba Satellite Laptop, Model PSAFOU-01Q009, Serial Number 37207099Q
Case Number: 4:2010cv00112
Filed: January 20, 2010
Court: Missouri Eastern District Court
Office: St. Louis Office
County: St. Louis - City
Presiding Judge: Donald J. Stohr
Referring Judge:
Nature of Suit: Forfeit/Penalty: Other
Cause of Action: 18:981 Forfeiture (Wire Fraud)
Jury Demanded By: None

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 Missouri Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: United States of America v. $264.70 U.S. Currency et al
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: Julia M. Wright
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: $264.70 U.S. 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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Toshiba Satellite Laptop, Model PSAFOU-01Q009, Serial Number 37207099Q
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.