Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 canonical passages across 5 cases, quoted by 35 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from United States v. Cambio Exacto, S.A..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | United States v. Cambio Exacto, S.A. Anchor | green | “to establish statutory standing, a claimant asserting rights in property that has been seized and that is the subject of a forfeiture action in rem must file a verified claim within ten days after process has been executed, unless the court grants an extension.” | 7 |
| 2 | Keepers, Inc. v. City of Milford | green | “general prohibition on a litigant's raising another person's legal rights.” | 6 |
| 3 | Steinberger Ex Rel. Last Will & Testament of Steinberger v. Lefkowitz | green | “the claimant . . . bears the burden 'clearly to allege facts in his complaint demonstrating that he is a proper party to invoke judicial resolution of the dispute.” | 6 |
| 4 | United States v. Vazquez-Alvarez | green | “any 'person who asserts an interest' in the res that is the subject of a forfeiture action may 'contest the forfeiture by filing a claim in the court where the action is pending.” | 6 |
| 5 | United States v. Vazquez-Alvarez | green | “in rem forfeiture actions are governed by rule g of the forfeiture rules and the civil asset forfeiture reform act of 2000 ('cafra').” | 6 |
| 6 | United States v. $10,300 | green | “a person seeking to challenge a forfeiture therefore lacks statutory standing if he or she has not filed a claim pursuant to rule g(5).” | 4 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.