Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A confiscation order is a court order made in the Crown Court requiring a convicted defendant to pay a specified amount of money to the state by a specified date. Secondly, there are cash forfeiture proceedings, which take place (in England and Wales) in a magistrates' court with a right of appeal to the Crown Court , having been brought by ...
In civil forfeiture, assets are seized by police based on a suspicion of wrongdoing, and without having to charge a person with specific wrongdoing, with the case being between police and the thing itself, sometimes referred to by the Latin term in rem, meaning "against the property"; the property itself is the defendant and no criminal charge ...
A quasi in rem legal action (Latin, "as if against a thing") is a legal action based on property rights of a person absent from the jurisdiction.In the American legal system the state can assert power over an individual simply based on the fact that this individual has property (bank account, debt, share of stock, land) in the state.
One species of this writ is called a "writ of body attachment". This writ may be available to a court wishing to bring into its presence a person who has been held in contempt of court. In this situation, the writ is also sometimes called a "writ of bodily attachment", an "order of commitment for civil contempt", or a "warrant for civil arrest ...
The Surrogate overruled Mullane's objections, and entered a decree accepting the accounting and terminating any rights the beneficiaries may have had against Central Hanover for mismanagement of the trust. The New York Supreme Court Appellate Division subsequently affirmed, as did the New York Court of Appeals.
A divided Supreme Court ruled Thursday that authorities do not have to provide a quick hearing when they seize cars and other property used in drug crimes, even when the property belongs to so ...
Many circuit courts have said that law enforcement can hold your property for as long as they want. D.C.’s high court decided last week that’s unconstitutional.
The court ruled that it is necessary for the government to be able to seize property for its uses, such as creating infrastructure, which ultimately are determined by the legislature and not the judiciary. This essentially gives the government ultimate ownership over all property, because it is not viable for the government to hold out against ...