United States of America v. $503,000.42 in U. S. Currency
Filing
21
CONSENT ORDER - Signed by District Judge Louise Wood Flanagan on 12/2/2016. (Baker, C.)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
WESTERN DIVISION
NO. 5:15-CV-150-FL
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
v.
$503,000.42 IN U. S. CURRENCY,
Defendant.
CONSENT ORDER
By signing below, the undersigned parties have consented to
the entry of this Order and have informed the Court the following:
1.
They have settled the litigation in this matter.
2.
The parties’ settlement is neither a concession by the
United
States
forfeiture
nor
that
an
the
defendant
admission
of
currency
wrongdoing
is
by
not
the
subject
to
Claimant.
Rather, the parties’ settlement is merely a compromise to avoid
the delay, uncertainty, inconvenience, and expense of protracted
litigation of the Government’s claims relating to forfeiture of
the defendant currency.
It is, therefore,
ORDERED that the United States shall return to the Claimant
$503,000.42 of the subject currency seized, less any debt owed to
1
the United States, any agency of the United States, or any other
debt in which the United States is authorized to collect. Payment
to be made payable to Claimant via electronic funds transfer by
the U.S. Marshal’s Service according to the information provided
by Claimant on the executed UFMS Vendor Request Form;
ORDERED that each party shall bear its own attorneys’ fees,
costs and expenses in this litigation;
Upon the entry of this order, the Clerk of Court is DIRECTED
to close this case.
SO ORDERED this 2nd day of __________, 2016.
__
December
_____________________________
LOUIS W. FLANAGAN
United States District Judge
Consented to by:
/s/ Stephen A. West__________________
STEPHEN A. WEST
Attorney for United States of America
/s/ Glenn A. Barfield________________
Glenn A. Barfield
Attorney for Claimant
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?