Brief filed: 01/28/2014
Documents
United States v. 475 Martin Lane
9th Circuit Court of Appeals; Case No. 12-56922 & 13-5555 & 13-5556
Prior Decision
On appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California, Case No. 2:04-cv-02788-ABC-PLA.
Argument(s)
Congress enacted the CAFRA fee provision, over the government’s objection, to ensure the availability of competent counsel for persons whose property the government seizes and seeks to forfeit. The Anti-Assignment Act does not apply to assignments of potential future CAFRA fee awards. The defense of a civil forfeiture case does not involve a claim against the government. Future, potential rights to recover statutory attorney fees are not claims against the government.
Author(s)
John D. Cline, Law Office of John D. Cline, San Francisco, CA; Lara Kollios, Boersch Shapiro LLP, San Francisco, CA; David Porter, Sacramento, CA.
