United States v. $72,070.27 in U.S. Currency, Charles David Johnson, Jr., Claimant-Appellant

Sixth Circuit

United States v. $72,070.27 in U.S. Currency, Charles David Johnson, Jr., Claimant-Appellant

905 F.2d 1539, 1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 10448, 1990 WL 85345

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

DecidedJune 22, 1990

Docket89-6486

StatusUnpublished

This text of 905 F.2d 1539 (United States v. $72,070.27 in U.S. Currency, Charles David Johnson, Jr., Claimant-Appellant) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. $72,070.27 in U.S. Currency, Charles David Johnson, Jr., Claimant-Appellant, 905 F.2d 1539, 1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 10448, 1990 WL 85345 (6th Cir. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

905 F.2d 1539

Unpublished Disposition
NOTICE: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Sixth Circuit.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
$72,070.27 IN U.S. CURRENCY, Defendant,
Charles David Johnson, Jr., Claimant-Appellant.

No. 89-6486.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

June 22, 1990.

Before MILBURN and DAVID A. NELSON, Circuit Judges, and LIVELY, Senior Circuit Judge.

ORDER

Charles David Johnson, Jr., appeals from the district court's order denying Johnson's motion for summary judgment in this forfeiture case. 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1355 (1988). In its brief, the government argues that this court lacks jurisdiction over the appeal. In his reply brief, Johnson has responded to this argument.

The government seized the currency in question during an investigation of drug offenses. The government then moved for forfeiture of the currency, and Johnson moved for summary judgment. The district court entered an order that denied Johnson's motion for summary judgment and disposed of other matters. Johnson appealed from this order. The case is still pending in the district court.

Generally, an order denying a motion for summary judgment is not appealable. Huron Valley Hosp., Inc. v. City of Pontiac, 792 F.2d 563, 566 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 885 (1986). Johnson's case falls under this general rule. The cases Johnson cites in his reply brief can all be distinguished on their facts. Therefore, Johnson has filed an appeal from a nonappealable order.

The case is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction under Rule 9(b)(1), Rules of the Sixth Circuit.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI