United States of America v. $40,173.25 in United States Currency et al

Filing 16

ORDER denying as moot 9 Motion for More Definite Statement. Signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis Howell on 10/25/2013. (thh)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
BRYSON CITY DIVISION
2:13cv26
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
$40,173.25 in UNITED STATES
)
CURRENCY and $40,000.00 in UNITED )
STATES CURRENCY,
)
)
Defendants.
)
___________________________________ )

ORDER

Pending before the Court is the Government’s Motion to Compel and for
More Definite Statement [# 9]. This is a forfeiture action against currency.
Paragraph 8 of the Complaint specifically incorporated the individually
enumerated paragraphs in the affidavit of Billy Stites, an agent with the Bureau of
Indian Affairs. The affidavit was attached to the Complaint. Subsequently,
Claimant William Dean Hyatt filed an Answer to the Complaint, but he did not
admit or deny the individually enumerated paragraphs in the affidavit of Agent
Stites. The Government then moved the Court to compel Claimant Hyatt to admit
or deny the factual paragraphs contained in the affidavit of Agent Stites. Rather
than respond to the motion, Claimant filed an Amended Answer that admitted or
denied the enumerated paragraphs in the affidavit. Accordingly, the Court
1

DENIES as moot the motion [# 9].
As the Court has previously explained to the Government, it could eliminate
the need for filing these motions, as well as the confusion to claimants by
specifically including the factual allegations set forth in the affidavits attached to
the complaints in the body of the complaints. This is the ordinary practice in
drafting a complaint. The Court is unclear why the Government does not simply
put the factual allegations that it wants a claimant to admit or deny into the body of
the Complaint, and the Court strongly recommends that it do so in the future.
Signed: October 25, 2013

2