Legal Opinion
United States v. Cone
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Decided December 17, 2010No. 09-13824PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Per curiam
ClearGlass, LLC (“ClearGlass”) appeals from the district court’s order vacating preliminary orders of forfeiture (“POF”) that had become part of the final judgments entered in this criminal case against Michael and Joanne Cone. We conclude that ClearGlass — as a non-party petitioner from a vacated ancillary proceeding — has no standing to challenge the district court’s vacatur order; therefore, we dismiss ClearGlass’s appeal.
I. BACKGROUND
Michael and Joanne Cone pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit bankruptcy fraud; Mr. Cone also pleaded guilty to two counts of bankruptcy fraud.…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Warth v. SeldinSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Adam Elend v. Sun Dome, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2006
- Mulhall v. Unite Here Local 355Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2010
- United States v. Robert PetrieCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2002
- United States v. MarionCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2009
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- United States v. Frank AmodeoCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2019
- United States v. DavenportCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2012
- United States v. OregonCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2012
- Sunrise Academy v. United StatesDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2011
- United States v. EganCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2016
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.