U.S. Code » Title 18 » Part PART I— CRIMES › Chapter CHAPTER 46— FORFEITURE

18 U.S.C. § 985

Civil forfeiture of real property

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 18 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, all civil forfeitures of real property and interests in real property shall proceed as judicial forfeitures.(b)(1) Except as provided in this section—(A) real property that is the subject of a civil forfeiture action shall not be seized before entry of an order of forfeiture; and(B) the owners or occupants of the real property shall not be evicted from, or otherwise deprived of the use and enjoyment of, real property that is the subject of a pending forfeiture action.(2) The filing of a lis pendens and the execution of a writ of entry for the purpose of conducting an inspection and inventory of the property shall not be considered a seizure under this subsection.(c)(1) The Government shall initiate a civil forfeiture action against real property by—(A) filing a complaint for forfeiture;(B) posting a notice of the complaint on the property; and(C) serving notice on the property owner, along with a copy of the complaint.(2) If the property owner cannot be served with the notice under paragraph (1) because the owner—(A) is a fugitive;(B) resides outside the United States and efforts at service pursuant to rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure are unavailing; or(C) cannot be located despite the exercise of due diligence,constructive service may be made in accordance with the laws of the State in which the property is located.(3) If real property has been posted in accordance with this subsection, it shall not be necessary for the court to issue an arrest warrant in rem, or to take any other action to establish in rem jurisdiction over the property.(d)(1) Real property may be seized prior to the entry of an order of forfeiture if—(A) the Government notifies the court that it intends to seize the property before trial; and(B) the court—(i) issues a notice of application for warrant, causes the notice to be served on the property owner and posted on the property, and conducts a hearing in which the property owner has a meaningful opportunity to be heard; or(ii) makes an ex parte determination that there is probable cause for the forfeiture and that there are exigent circumstances that permit the Government to seize the property without prior notice and an opportunity for the property owner to be heard.(2) For purposes of paragraph (1)(B)(ii), to establish exigent circumstances, the Government shall show that less restrictive measures such as a lis pendens, restraining order, or bond would not suffice to protect the Government’s interests in preventing the sale, destruction, or continued unlawful use of the real property.(e) If the court authorizes a seizure of real property under subsection (d)(1)(B)(ii), it shall conduct a prompt post-seizure hearing during which the property owner shall have an opportunity to contest the basis for the seizure.(f) This section—(1) applies only to civil forfeitures of real property and interests in real property;(2) does not apply to forfeitures of the proceeds of the sale of such property or interests, or of money or other assets intended to be used to acquire such property or interests; and(3) shall not affect the authority of the court to enter a restraining order relating to real property.(Added Pub. L. 106–185, § 7(a), Apr. 25, 2000, 114 Stat. 214.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, referred to in subsec. (c)(2)(B), are set out in the Appendix to Title 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date

Section applicable to any forfeiture proceeding commenced on or after the date that is 120 days after Apr. 25, 2000, see section 21 of Pub. L. 106–185, set out as an Effective Date of 2000 Amendment note under section 1324 of Title 8, Aliens and Nationality.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 48 cases (20 in the last 5 years), 2001–2026 · leading case: United States v. Bowman, 341 F.3d 1228 (11th Cir. 2003).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
United States v. Bowman, 341 F.3d 1228 (11th Cir. 2003). · cites it 18× “Following the seizure, the Bowmans received a post-seizure adversarial hearing, in accordance with 18 U.S.C. § 985 (e), at which they contested the basis for the ex parte seizure.”
Langbord v. United States Dep't of the Treasury, 832 F.3d 170 (3d Cir. 2016). · cites it 2× “See also 18 U.S.C. § 985 (b)(1)(A) (stating the general rule that “real property that is the subject of a civil forfeiture action shall not be seized before entry of an order of forfeiture”).”
United States v. 630 Ardmore Dr., City of Durham, Parkwood, 178 F. Supp. 2d 572 (M.D.N.C. 2001). · cites it 4× “18 U.S.C. § 985 (a). Under the new CAFRA provisions, the Government is not required to procure the summons and warrant for arrest in rem specified in the Supplemental Rules.”
United States v. Real Prop. Known as 200 Acres of Land Near FM 2686 Rio Grande City, 773 F.3d 654 (5th Cir. 2014). · cites it 3× “*659 If the defendant in an in rem forfeiture action is real property, the government must proceed in accordance with 18 U.S.C. § 985 . See Supplemental Rule G(3)(a).”
United States v. Real Prop. Located at 730 Glen-Mady Way, 590 F. Supp. 2d 1295 (E.D. Cal. 2008). · cites it 4× “18 U.S.C. § 985 (c)(3) (“If real property has been posted in accordance with this subsection, it shall not be necessary for the court to issue an arrest warrant in rem, or to take any other action to establish in rem jurisdiction over the property”); see also Supplemental Rule…”
United States v. Certain Real Prop. Located at 263 Weatherbrook Lane, 202 F. Supp. 2d 1275 (N.D. Ala. 2002). · cites it 4× “On January 23, 2002, the Government made an ex parte application to this Court, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 985 (d)(1)(B)(ii), for the issuance of a warrant for seizure of the subject real property.”
United States v. Real Prop. Located at 11211 East Arabian Park Drive, 379 F. Supp. 2d 1058 (D. Ariz. 2005). · cites it 11× “The Government contends that 18 U.S.C. § 985 (b)(2) “allows for a writ of entry” for the purpose of inspection and inventory of the property but “provides no guidance as to its proper use or scope.”
United States v. Real Prop. Located at 14420 Tukwila Int'l Boulevard, 979 F. Supp. 2d 1191 (W.D. Wash. 2013). · cites it 11× “) On August 26, 2013, Magistrate Judge Mary Alice Theiler made an ex parte determination that there was probable cause for forfeiture, and that exigent circumstances existed to permit the seizure pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 985 (d)(l)(B)(ii). In the Matter of the Seizure of Real…”
United States v. James Munson, 477 F. App'x 57 (4th Cir. 2012). · cites it 2× “CAFRA provisions governing civil forfeiture of real property provide that “[t]he Government shall initiate a civil forfeiture action against real property by,” inter alia, “serving notice on the property owner, along with a copy of the complaint.”
Cindy Omidi v. United States, 851 F.3d 859 (9th Cir. 2017). “18 U.S.C. § 985 (a). The same is true with respect to personal property worth more than $500,000, subject to a few exceptions not relevant here.”
Boyd v. United States of Am., 209 F. Supp. 3d 160 (D.D.C. 2016). “Finally, the plaintiff claims that the forfeiture of his property did not comply with 18 U.S.C. § 985 (d)(1)(A), which calls for notice and a hearing prior to the seizure of real property, as well as a court order prior to forfeiture.”
United States v. Sum of $70,990,605, 991 F. Supp. 2d 154 (D.D.C. 2013). “Compare 18 U.S.C. § 985 (e) (requiring a court to hold a "prompt post-seizure hearing” when real property is seized to allow a property owner to contest the basis of the seizure) with 18 U.”
Show all 48 citing cases →
18 U.S.C. § 985(e): 1 case
United States v. One 2003 Ferrari Enzo AB Version E, VIN : ZFFCZ56B000132659, No. 1:24-cv-01345 (N.D.N.Y. July 22, 2025).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.