The U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C. Photo: Diego M. Radzinschi/ALM SCOTUS to Decide If the Feds Have to Follow the Forfeiture Rules
The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in 'McIntosh v. United States' to determine whether a district court may enter a preliminary order of forfeiture divesting a defendant of his or her property outside the time limits set forth in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. The court's decision in 'McIntosh' may clarify whether the government can be strictly held to the kinds of deadlines that bedevil every other litigant.
January 03, 2024 at 10:15 AM
8 minute read
On Sept. 29, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in McIntosh v. United States to determine whether a district court may enter a preliminary order of forfeiture divesting a defendant of his or her property outside the time limits set forth in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
A preliminary order of forfeiture is typically a ministerial formality and rarely the subject of controversy. A circuit split has developed, however, regarding the consequences that may arise from the government's failure to comply with the requirements of the preliminary order rule in a timely fashion.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Walt Disney, IBM Denied High Court Review of Old NY Franchise Tax Law
3 minute read
Legal Community Luminaries Honored at New York State Bar Association’s Annual Meeting
22-Count Indictment Is Just the Start of SCOTUSBlog Atty's Legal Problems, Experts Say
5 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1The Lawyers Waging the Legal Fight Against the Trump Administration
- 2McDermott's Onetime London Leader Headed to Pillsbury
- 3A&O Shearman To Lose Another Five Lawyers to EY
- 4Pearl Cohen Enters San Francisco Market Via Combination With IP Boutique
- 5'Incredibly Complicated'? Antitrust Litigators Identify Pros and Cons of Proposed One Agency Act
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
