Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 295 F.3d 23 - United States v. All Funds in Account Nos 747034/278 747009/278 & 747714/278 Banco Espanol De Credito Spain

United States v. All Funds in Account Nos 747034/278 747009/278 & 747714/278 Banco Espanol De Credito Spain’s Empirical Analysis

295 F.3d 23 · 2002

Citation profile

33
cited by 33 later decisions
October 2024
most recently cited

7 federal appellate · 14 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently October 2024 · most notably United States v. Approximately $1.67 Million (US) in Cash, Stock, & Other Valuable Assets held by or at: 1) Total Aviation Ldt. (2008), 959 F. Supp. 2d 81 - United States v. All Assets Held at Bank Julius Baer & Co. (2013)

7 federal appellate · 14 district ·

160200220102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Calero-Toledo v. Pearson Yacht Leasing Co. · United States v. James Daniel Good Real Property · The Brig Ann · United States v. La Vengeance · R.M.S. Titanic, Inc. v. Haver

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “a forfeiture order of a United States court will not have its full effect until the res — the money — is brought within the territory of the United States,”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[G]iven the uncertainties of foreign cooperation, Congress may not have wanted to force the government to bring forfeiture proceedings within five years to recover such property.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[t]he forfeiture provisions for drug proceeds adopt the traditional requirements `for violations of the customs laws' but only `insofar as applicable and not inconsistent' with the drug forfeiture laws.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.