New case from the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals discussing Rule G of the Supplemental Rules and the interplay with Rule 55 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The case is United States of America v. $22,050.00 United States Currency and can be found here.
The issue: The rules governing admiralty actions (including in rem forfeiture actions) are strict with defined deadlines which are unforgiving. The rules governing civil procedure, however, are more forgiving and designed to have cases decided on the merits, not on technicalities. [Author note: So sayeth the Sixth Circuit, federal practitioners know otherwise].
Rule G required a verified claim within 35 days of notice. The claimant did not make that deadline. The claimant sought to set aside the entry of default citing to Rule 55. Rule 55 allows defaults taken (after service of process) to be set aside for "good cause." So, when a claimant in an in rem action is barred by Rule G as untimely, but a claimant could show "good cause," should the Court set aside the default?
This court said yes and reversed the District Court's dismissal of the claim.
Comments