Arbelaez v. United States

Order granting the government's motion to dismiss


Both plaintiffs and government attorneys seem to love to argue that the seizure of property in the context of a criminal arrest, or in the context of civil asset forfeiture, violate the Just Compensation Clause of the Fifth Amendment. And despite the fact that no court has agreed with this argument does not stop litigants from making it. The U.S. Court of Federal Claims has just decided a case that explains why this argument has no merit.

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

Reference Info:Decision | Federal, Federal Circuit | United States

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Nancie G. Marzulla, Marzulla Law, LLC | Attorney Advertising

Written by:


Marzulla Law, LLC on:

Popular Topics
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.