Legal Opinion

One Hundred Barrels of Whiskey

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided November 15, 1867PublishedCited by 2 opinions

This was a libel of information, filed November 26th, 1866, on behalf of the United States, against “100 barrels of whiskey, and all the tools, implements, instruments and personal property whatever, found in the distillery, 48 Broadway.” It averred, that the property proceeded against had been seized on the 23d of November. 1866, as forfeited.

Read the full summary

This was a libel of information, filed November 26th, 1866, on behalf of the United States, against “100 barrels of whiskey, and all the tools, implements, instruments and personal property whatever, found in the distillery, 48 Broadway.” It averred, that the property proceeded against had been seized on the 23d of November. 1866, as forfeited. On the 7th of January, 1867, on the consent of the claimant of the property, a decree was entered, the purport of which was to condemn all of the property except the whiskey, and release it to the claimant, in consideration of the payment by him, into…

1Opinion of the Court

BLATCHFORD, District Judge.

The report of the commissioner proceeds upon an erroneous view of the statute. The informer’s share is not given to the person who first gives information on which property is seized, but to the person who first informs of the cause, matter or thing whereby the forfeiture was incurred. In most cases, the distinction is unimportant and does not arise. The property is generally seized, libelled and condemned for the cause of forfeiture pointed out by the information furnished by the informer before the seizure. But this case illustrates the distinction between…

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. United States v. SimonsDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1881
  2. United States v. The City of MexicoDistrict Court, S.D. Florida · 1887

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

Powered by the Exa API