BURRISS

v.

NORTHERN ASSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA

Citator

Cited By (18 total)

• Ruth v. Dep't OF Legal Affairs, 684 So. 2d 181 (Fla. 1996)
  …ct classifies forfeiture as part of the criminal penalty against an individual.12 Consequently, federal courts view RICO ac [*185] tions as in personam against the defendant. See United States v. Conner, 752 F. 2d 566, 576 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 821,106 S.Ct. 72, 88 L.Ed.2d 59 (1985); United States v. Cauble, 706 F. 2d 1322,1349 (5th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1005, 104 S.Ct. 996, 79 L.Ed.2d 229 (1984); United States v. L’Hoste, 609 F. 2d 796, 813 n. 15 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S.…
• Boyle v. United Techs. Corp., 487 U.S. 500 (U.S. 1988)
  …applying defense in DOHSA ease), cert. pending, No. 86-674; Shaw v. Grumman Aerospace Corp., 778 F. 2d 736 (CA11 1985) (same), cert. pending, No. 85-1529; Koutsoubos v. Boeing Vertol, Division of Boeing Co., 755 F. 2d 352 (CA3) (same), cert. denied, 474 U. S. 821 (1985); McKay v. Rockwell Int’l Corp., 704 F. 2d 444 (CA9 1983) (same), cert. denied, 464 U. S. 1043 (1984).…
• United States v. Gennaro J. Angiulo, 897 F.2d 1169 (1st Cir. 1990)
  …gest that their in personam reasoning is limited only to (a)(1) forfeiture. Rather, they state that RICO forfeiture, presumably in general, is an in personam sanction. See, e.g., United States v. Conner, 752 F. 2d 566, 576 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 821, 106 S.Ct. 72, 88 L.Ed.2d 59 (1985); United States v. Cauble, 706 F. 2d 1322, 1349 (5th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1005, 104 S.Ct. 996, 79 L.Ed.2d 229 (1984). We, therefore, reject defendants’ contention that (a)(2) forfeiture can only occur…