Legal Opinion
United States v. Christopher Kim
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided August 13, 2015No. 12-56922, 13-55555, 13-55556PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judge:
Christopher Kim and members of his family defeated the Government’s attempts to forfeit property seized in connection with a criminal investigation. Thereafter, Kim received several significant awards of attorney’s fees. Eric Honig, Kim’s lawyer, asked the district court that he be paid those fees directly, pursuant to an assignment in their representation agreement. The Government asserts that the Anti-Assignment Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3727, voids such an assignment.
We agree that the Anti-Assignment Act invalidates an assignment of an .award of statutory attorney’s…
2Cases cited45 opinions
- Astrue v. RatliffSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
- New Hampshire v. MaineSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
- Miller v. GammieCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
- United States v. James Daniel Good Real PropertySupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- United States v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- United States v. KimCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2015
- Calsoft Labs, Inc. v. PanchumarthiDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2020
- He Nam You v. JapanDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2015