Cases 1 - 10 of 213
USA v. $11,800.11 US Currency
as 1:2024cv00109
Plaintiff:
USA
Defendant:
$11,800.11 US Currency
Cause Of Action: 21 U.S.C. § 881 Forfeiture Property-Drugs
USA v. Kimber Super Carry CSTM pistol et al
as 1:2024cv00010
Plaintiff:
USA
Defendant:
Kimber Super Carry CSTM pistol, Big Horn Armory, Inc. AR-500 rifle, Browning A-Bolt rifle and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 0924 Firearms Penalties
USA v. $20,000.00 in US Currency Seized From Fifth Third Bank Account xxxxxx0146
as 3:2023cv01545
Plaintiff:
USA
Defendant:
$20,000.00 in US Currency Seized From Fifth Third Bank Account xxxxxx0146
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1341 Complaint for Forfeiture
USA v. $69,000.00 US Currency
as 1:2023cv00367
Plaintiff:
USA
Defendant:
$69,000.00 US Currency
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 0981 Forfeiture Property
USA v. $87,100.00 US Currency
as 1:2023cv00326
Plaintiff:
USA
Defendant:
$87,100.00 US Currency
Cause Of Action: 21 U.S.C. § 881 Forfeiture Property - Other
USA v. $20,315.84 US Currency
as 1:2022cv00472
Plaintiff:
USA
Defendant:
$20,315.84 US Currency
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 0981 Forfeiture Property
USA v. $9,435.00 US Currency
as 1:2022cv00372
Plaintiff:
USA
Defendant:
$9,435.00 US Currency
Cause Of Action: 21 U.S.C. § 881 Forfeiture Property-Drugs
Soto-Nunez v. US Drug Enforcement Admin. Forfeiture Counsel
as 22-1679
Plaintiff / Appellant:
VILEIKA SOTO-NUNEZ
Defendant / Appellee:
US DRUG ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. $53,171 IN US CURRENCY
as 1:2021cv00358
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant:
$53,171 IN US CURRENCY
Claimant:
CHAD BUBIER
Cause Of Action: 21 U.S.C. § 881
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. $113,750 IN US CURRENCY et al
as 1:2021cv00357
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant:
$113,750 IN US CURRENCY and $3,437.83 IN US CURRENCY
Claimant:
MARY ARCHER-BREY and WILLIAM R BREY
Cause Of Action: 21 U.S.C. § 881
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.
