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.)

Download PDF
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?