United States v. 2004 Ferrari 360 Modeno
2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 158661
S.D. Tex.2012Background
- Civil forfeiture of a 2004 Ferrari 360 Modeno (VIN ZFFYU51A240137976) linked to counterfeiting activity; Government seeks forfeiture under 49 U.S.C. § 80303.
- Claimant Josette Claude asserts ownership/innocent-owner status to defeat forfeiture; Evens Claude also files a seized-property claim.
- Government moves to strike Claimant’s claim for lack of standing; argues Claimant is not the owner and has no colorable interest.
- Factual dispute over whether Claude funded the purchase; alleged Pennsylvania joint venture; law applied for joint-venture analysis.
- Court held standing issue must be resolved first; Pennsylvania law governs the joint-venture question; later denied Claude’s innocent-owner theory and granted Government’s motion to strike.
- Evens Claude’s claim was resolved separately and denied after finding conviction occurred prior to challenge; civil-forfeiture context remains unchanged.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Claimant has standing to challenge the forfeiture | Claude is an innocent owner; funds funded the car purchase | Claude lacks ownership; no innocent-owner status | Claude lacks standing; government motion granted |
| Whether Claimant’s alleged joint venture creates an ownership interest | Pennsylvania law governs; joint venture shows ownership | Texas law governs; no joint-venture elements proven | Pennsylvania law applies; no joint-venture found; no ownership |
| Whether Reckmeyer-based unsecured creditor theory applies to civil forfeiture | Reckmeyer allows unsecured creditor standing in some cases | Reckmeyer is non-binding and in criminal context; not applicable | Reckmeyer inapplicable to civil forfeiture; not controlling |
| Whether Claimant was a bailee with colorable interest in the property | Claimant funding constitutes bailee interests | Claimant is a bailor, not bailee; no colorable interest | Claimant is a bailor; cannot qualify as innocent owner; no standing |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. $9,041,598.68, 163 F.3d 238 (5th Cir.1998) (standing threshold in forfeiture cases)
- United States v. Reckmeyer, 836 F.2d 200 (4th Cir.1987) (unsecured creditors’ standing in criminal forfeiture; not adopted for civil forfeiture)
- United States v. BCCI Holdings (Luxembourg), S.A., 46 F.3d 1185 (D.C. Cir.1995) (general creditor standing rejected in civil forfeiture context)
- United States v. Ribadeneira, 105 F.3d 833 (2d Cir.1997) (caution against adopting Reckmeyer rule in civil cases)