[arcticbull]

Typical of asset forfeiture, as the charges are made against property instead of people ("in rem") to entirely side-step the whole innocent until proven guilty thing. That applies to people, not property, so you charge the property. Disgusting practice in general, IMO, but hilarious case names.

"United States v. An Article Consisting of 50,000 Cardboard Boxes More or Less, Each Containing One Pair of Clacker Balls" [1]

"United States v. One Lucite Ball Containing Lunar Material (One Moon Rock) and One Ten Inch by Fourteen Inch Wooden Plaque" [2]

[1] https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=671831224892866...

[2] https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=644728520528855...

[schneidmaster]

My personal favorite is "United States v. Approximately 64,695 Pounds of Shark Fins" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Approximately...)

[jonas21]

I rather like United States v. One Book Called Ulysses, in no small part because the book won.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._One_Book_Call...

[owenversteeg]

Hahah, interesting backstory on that one. Quote from Wikipedia:

In 1932 Random House, which had the rights to publish the entire book in the United States, decided to bring a test case to challenge the de facto ban, so as to publish the work without fear of prosecution. It therefore made an arrangement to import the edition published in France, and to have a copy seized by the U.S. Customs Service when the ship carrying the work arrived. Although Customs had been told in advance of the anticipated arrival of the book, it was not confiscated on arrival, and instead was forwarded on to Random House in New York City. As seizure by Customs was essential to the plan for a test case, Morris Ernst, the attorney for Random House, took the unopened package to Customs, demanded that it be seized, and it was.

[1f60c]

Oh, that's interesting. Thank you!