Skip navigation

U.S. v. Marsh, No. 94-2232 (4th Cir.) (105 F.3d 927) (January 31, 1997) (Judge H. Emory Jr. Widener)

Case held that a failure to comply with the notice requirements specified in U.S. v. James Daniel Good, 510 U.S. 43 (1993) did not immunize the property from forfeiture.

In this case the Court addressed the Circuit split that exists regarding the appropriate remedy in civil forfeiture cases where the ...

 

Full article and associated cases available to subscribers.

As a digital subscriber to Punch and Jurists, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.

Subscribe today

Already a subscriber? Login