Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Benchick

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan

October 25, 2017

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
v.
D-1 JOHN S. BENCHICK, Defendant.

          DANIEL L. LEMISCH Acting United States Attorney LINDA M. AOUATE (P70693) Assistant United States Attorney ROBERT AMERIGUIAN Managing Member Adrian Farm Fund, LLC

          JORIN G. RUBIN (P60867) Counsel for Petitioner

          STIPULATION FOR ENTRY OF ORDER SETTLING AND RESOLVING PETITION FILED BY ADRIAN FARM FUND, LLC

          Honorable Robert H. Cleland, Judge.

         Plaintiff, by and through its counsel, together with Adrian Farm Fund, LLC, (Petitioner) by and through its attorney, Jorin Rubin, hereby submit this Stipulation for Entry of an Order Settling and Resolving the Petition to Adjudicate the Validity of Interest in Property filed by Petitioner (17-mc-50074; ECF 3) concerning the following property (hereinafter the “Subject Property”):

Three Hundred Seven Thousand Five Hundred Eighteen Dollars and Seventy-Three Cents ($307, 518.73) in U.S. currency in net proceeds from the sale of, and in lieu of, real property located at 2850 E. U.S. 223, Adrian, MI, 49221 and 2850 E U.S. 223, Madison Township, MI, 49221.

         On October 6, 2016, this Court entered a Preliminary Order of Forfeiture in Criminal Case No. 13-cr-20453 (ECF 89) ordering the forfeiture to the United States of all defendant Benchick's right, title and interest in the Subject Property. However, the forfeiture order provides that if defendant Benchick appeals from his conviction on Count One of the Second Superseding Indictment, the government will stay the execution of forfeiture as to the Subject Property to ensure that it remains available pending appellate review. (13-cr-20453; ECF 89). The forfeiture order further provides,

the stay will not delay the ancillary proceeding or the determination of a third party's rights or interests. If the Court rules in favor of any third party while an appeal is pending, the Court may amend the order of forfeiture but must not transfer any property interest to a third party until the decision on appeal becomes final, unless Defendant consents in writing or on the record.

(13-cr-20453; ECF 89). Defendant Benchick filed an appeal, which is currently pending before the United States Court of Appeals, for the Sixth Circuit (Case No. 16-2471, USA v. John Benchick) (the “Benchick Appeal”).[1]

         Petitioner filed a petition claiming an interest in the Subject Property in the amount of $115, 000.00. (17-mc-50074; ECF 3).

         The period for filing an ancillary petition asserting an interest in the Subject Property has expired and with the exception of Petitioner and David Slates, no other persons have filed a petition.[2]

         The undersigned parties recognize the inherent potential risks of litigation, are aware of their respective rights, and wish to resolve this matter without further litigation and expense. Accordingly, the undersigned parties have reached a settlement regarding the Subject Property.

         NOW, THEREFORE, the parties, whose signatures appear below, hereby stipulate and agree, and seek the immediate entry of an Order as follows:

         1. These are ancillary proceedings under 21 U.S.C. § 853(n) stemming from the criminal case of defendant John ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.