United States v. Funds in the Amount of $574,840
889 F. Supp. 2d 1098
N.D. Ill.2012Background
- This is a civil in rem forfeiture action against funds totaling $664,? no, five items: $574,840; $63,184; $2,000; $856; and $21,100, brought by the United States.
- Claimants Unsworth and Pillsbury filed possessory/ownership claims; government moved to strike those claims for noncompliance with Supplemental Rules and lack of Article III standing.
- Claimants moved for a stay under 18 U.S.C. § 981(g)(2) due to criminal prosecutions in Cook County.
- The court issued a protective order under § 981(g)(3) to protect claimants’ interests while evaluating standing, and required responses to government Special Interrogatories under Rule G(6)(a).
- Claimants’ counsel largely failed to respond to Special Interrogatories, prompting renewed motions and further briefing, stalling merits.
- The court adjudicated the impasse by granting the government’s motions to strike the claims and denying the sealing portion of claimants’ last filing; a status hearing was set.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Article III standing in forfeiture action | Unsworth/Pillsbury have standing via ipse dixit claims. | Claimants lack proper standing; need more than self-serving statements. | Government standing arguments prevail; standing unresolved until merits; court grants strike |
| Authority to compel answers via Rule G(6) Special Interrogatories | Interrogatories protect government’s need for information. | Claimants refuse responses; protective order insufficient. | Government awarded; Special Interrogatories valid and enforceable |
| Motion to strike claimants’ claims under Rule G(8)(c) | Noncompliance justifies striking the claims. | Protective measures and standing issues hinder immediate striking. | Claims to be struck; government granted |
| Stay under 18 U.S.C. § 981(g)(2) | Stay warranted due to potential criminal prosecutions. | Stay not appropriate given ongoing procedural disputes. | Stay denied; proceedings to continue toward merits once standing resolved |
| Seal of portions of filings | Sealing necessary for protecting interests. | Sealing not necessary for all materials. | Sealing portion granted; remainder denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Baxter v. Palmigiano, 425 U.S. 308 (U.S. 1976) (Fifth Amendment/self-incrimination and adverse inferences in civil actions)
- United States v. $133,420 in United States Currency, 672 F.3d 629 (9th Cir. 2012) (precedent on standing and protective orders in forfeiture actions)