Legal Opinion

United States v. 2004 Ferrari 360 Modeno

District Court, S.D. Texas

Decided November 6, 2012No. Civil Action No. 4:10-4474PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER

VANESSA D. GILMORE, District Judge.

Pending before the Court is the claimant Josette Claude’s (“Claimant” or “Claude”) Claim for Seized Property (Instrument No. 9), Plaintiff the United States of America’s (“the Government” or “Plaintiff’) Motion to Strike Claim for Seized Property (Instrument No. 13), and Evens Claude’s Claim for Seized Property (Instrument No. 5). After a careful review of the pleadings; the motion, responses, and replies; the record; and the applicable law, the Court DENIES Claimant’s Claim for Seized Property (Instrument No. 9), GRANTS Plaintiffs Motion to Strike…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Haynsworth v. the CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1997
  2. Ingram v. DeereTexas Supreme Court · 2009
  3. SMALICH v. WestfallSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1970
  4. Pyeritz v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2011
  5. United States v. ReckmeyerCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1987

20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Six Thousand Dollars v. State Ex Rel. Mississippi Bureau of NarcoticsMississippi Supreme Court · 2015
  2. Byerly v. The Prudential Insurance Company of AmericaDistrict Court, E.D. Texas · 2020

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API