United States of America v. $409,805 in United States Currency
Plaintiff: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant: $409,805 IN UNITED STATES CURRENCY
Claimant: Max Hartman
Case Number: 1:2019cv06892
Filed: July 24, 2019
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Presiding Judge: Andrew L Carter
Nature of Suit: Drug Related Seizure of Property
Cause of Action: 21 U.S.C. ยง 881
Jury Demanded By: Defendant
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on January 21, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
September 11, 2019 Filing 8 ANSWER to #1 Complaint for Forfeiture with JURY DEMAND. Document filed by Max Hartman.(Barnett, Richard)
September 4, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 7 ORDER GRANTING CORRECTED MOTION TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE granting #6 Motion for Richard M. Barnett to Appear Pro Hac Vice. GOOD CAUSE APPEARING and the Court having been advised of the relevant facts, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Corrected Motion to Appear Pro Hae Vice of Richard M. Barnett is GRANTED. (Signed by Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr on 9/4/2019) (mml)
September 4, 2019 >>>NOTICE REGARDING PRO HAC VICE MOTION. Regarding Document No. #6 MOTION for Richard Mark Barnett to Appear Pro Hac Vice . Motion and supporting papers to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff.. The document has been reviewed and there are no deficiencies. (bcu)
September 3, 2019 Filing 6 MOTION for Richard Mark Barnett to Appear Pro Hac Vice . Motion and supporting papers to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff. Document filed by Max Hartman. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit, #2 Text of Proposed Order)(Barnett, Richard)
August 26, 2019 >>>NOTICE REGARDING DEFICIENT MOTION TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE. Notice to RE-FILE Document No. #5 MOTION for Richard Mark Barnett to Appear Pro Hac Vice . Filing fee $ 200.00, receipt number ANYSDC-17486539. Motion and supporting papers to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff... The filing is deficient for the following reason(s): missing Certificate of Good Standing from Supreme Court of California. We do not except them from a state bar association.; missing Proposed Order; Attorney Affidavit/Declaration is missing per local rule 1.3;. Re-file the motion as a Corrected Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice - attach the correct signed PDF - select the correct named filer/filers - attach valid Certificates of Good Standing issued within the past 30 days - attach Proposed Order.. (bcu)
August 23, 2019 Filing 5 FILING ERROR - DEFICIENT DOCKET ENTRY - MOTION for Richard Mark Barnett to Appear Pro Hac Vice . Filing fee $ 200.00, receipt number ANYSDC-17486539. Motion and supporting papers to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff. Document filed by Max Hartman.(Barnett, Richard) Modified on 8/26/2019 (bcu).
August 23, 2019 Filing 4 CLAIM FOR Opposing Forfeiture. Document filed by Max Hartman. (Barnett, Richard)
August 23, 2019 Filing 3 FIRST RULE 7.1 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT. No Corporate Parent. Document filed by Max Hartman.(Barnett, Richard)
July 25, 2019 CASE OPENING INITIAL ASSIGNMENT NOTICE: The above-entitled action is assigned to Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. Please download and review the Individual Practices of the assigned District Judge, located at #http://nysd.uscourts.gov/judges/District. Attorneys are responsible for providing courtesy copies to judges where their Individual Practices require such. Please download and review the ECF Rules and Instructions, located at #http://nysd.uscourts.gov/ecf_filing.php. (pne)
July 25, 2019 Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox is so designated. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b)(1) parties are notified that they may consent to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge. Parties who wish to consent may access the necessary form at the following link: #http://nysd.uscourts.gov/forms.php. (pne)
July 25, 2019 Case Designated ECF. (pne)
July 25, 2019 ***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY REGARDING PARTY MODIFICATION. Notice to attorney Elinor Lynn Tarlow. The party information for the following party/parties has been modified: United States of America. The information for the party/parties has been modified for the following reason/reasons: party name was entered in all caps. (pne)
July 24, 2019 Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed. (Tarlow, Elinor)
July 24, 2019 Filing 1 COMPLAINT FOR FORFEITURE against $409,805 IN UNITED STATES CURRENCY.Document filed by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.(Tarlow, Elinor)

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 New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: United States of America v. $409,805 in United States Currency
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: $409,805 IN UNITED STATES 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 ]
Plaintiff: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Represented By: Elinor Lynn Tarlow
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 ]
Claimant: Max Hartman
Represented By: Richard M Barnett
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?