# Justice Manual § 9-120.108: Knowledge that the Government has Asserted that a Particular Asset is Subject to Forfeiture > Federal · Agency guidance · In force URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/JM_S9-120.108 ## Section - **Citation:** Justice Manual § 9-120.108 - **Heading:** Knowledge that the Government has Asserted that a Particular Asset is Subject to Forfeiture - **Jurisdiction:** Federal - **Kind:** Agency guidance - **Status:** In force - **Text as of:** August 14, 2026 - **Source:** Compiled text - **Location:** DOJ Justice Manual / Title 9: Criminal / 9-120.000 - Attorney Fee Forfeiture Guidelines / Justice Manual § 9-120.108 ## Text Generally an attorney will have actual knowledge that the government has asserted a claim that an asset is subject to forfeiture based upon some proceedings instituted by the government. Normally the government will do this by initiating civil forfeiture proceedings against the asset, filing a lis pendens against real property, applying for pre-indictment or pre-conviction restraining orders under a criminal forfeiture statute, or obtaining an indictment containing a forfeiture count. A civil forfeiture proceeding, if known to an attorney, will establish actual knowledge of the forfeitability of any assets which are the subject of the proceeding since such assets must be specifically identified in the complaint. This is because in a civil forfeiture proceeding the res is the defendant and it must be sufficiently identified to allow seizure. A defendant, in most cases, will not be able to transfer an asset which is the subject of a civil forfeiture action to an attorney because the asset is actually seized as soon as the proceeding is instituted. However, in the rare case where a transfer takes place after the suit is initiated but before the seizure occurs, an attorney who has knowledge of the civil forfeiture action has actual knowledge that the particular asset is subject to forfeiture. For the same reason an attorney has actual knowledge of the forfeitability of any asset which he/she knows is subject to a restraining order based upon a forfeiture allegation in a criminal proceeding. However, when the government asserts a claim only by including a forfeiture count in an indictment and no assets have been restrained, the return of the indictment by itself will not necessarily establish actual knowledge that a particular asset is forfeitable. It will depend upon how specifically the asset is described in the forfeiture allegation. There are essentially three means by which an indictment can describe property that is alleged to be subject to forfeiture e count in an indictment and no assets have been restrained, the return of the indictment by itself will not necessarily establish actual knowledge that a particular asset is forfeitable. It will depend upon how specifically the asset is described in the forfeiture allegation. There are essentially three means by which an indictment can describe property that is alleged to be subject to forfeiture. It may specifically describe the property, such as "ten shares of stock in XYZ Corp. certificate nos. 1-10, purchased on January 1, 1985" or "account 12345 at First National Bank, Downtown Branch in the name of the defendant." It can set forth a generic description of certain property by amount and/or type, such as "ten shares of stock in XYZ Corp." or simply "$200,000." Finally, it can allege a broad all-inclusive description of property subject to forfeiture by incorporating statutory language, such as "any and all proceeds or profits of the criminal enterprise." If property is specifically described, an attorney undoubtedly has actual knowledge of its forfeitability if he/she is aware of the contents of the indictment. However, if property is included in the forfeiture count only under a generic description or by the inclusion of the all-inclusive statutory language, an attorney does not have actual knowledge based on that fact alone that any particular asset is forfeitable. Instead, reasonable grounds to believe that an attorney has actual knowledge that the asset is subject to forfeiture would have to be based on evidence that the attorney knew the asset in fact was from criminal misconduct. Of course, the fact that an all-inclusive forfeiture allegation or a generic description was included in the indictment would be relevant evidence to establish such knowledge. [new May 2010] ## Nearby sections - [Justice Manual § 9-120.100 Policy Limitations on Application of Forfeiture Provisions to Attorney Fees](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/JM_S9-120.100.md) - [Justice Manual § 9-120.101 Attorney Fee Forfeiture Guidelines](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/JM_S9-120.101.md) - [Justice Manual § 9-120.102 Forfeiture of Assets Transferred to an Attorney in a Fraudulent or Sham Transaction](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/JM_S9-120.102.md) - [Justice Manual § 9-120.103 Forfeiture of Assets Transferred to an Attorney for Representation in a Civil Matter](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/JM_S9-120.103.md) - [Justice Manual § 9-120.104 Forfeiture of Assets Transferred to an Attorney for Representation in a Criminal Matter](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/JM_S9-120.104.md) - [Justice Manual § 9-120.105 Discussion of Actual Knowledge and/or Reasonable Cause to Know](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/JM_S9-120.105.md) - [Justice Manual § 9-120.106 At the Time of the Transfer](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/JM_S9-120.106.md) - [Justice Manual § 9-120.107 Actual Knowledge of Forfeitability](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/JM_S9-120.107.md) - [Justice Manual § 9-120.108 Knowledge that the Government has Asserted that a Particular Asset is Subject to Forfeiture](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/JM_S9-120.108.md) - [Justice Manual § 9-120.109 Knowledge that the Asset in Fact is from Criminal Misconduct](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/JM_S9-120.109.md) - [Justice Manual § 9-120.110 Reasonable Cause to Know that an Asset is Subject to Forfeiture](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/JM_S9-120.110.md) - [Justice Manual § 9-120.111 Policy Concerning Issuance of Notification Letters to Attorneys](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/JM_S9-120.111.md) - [Justice Manual § 9-120.112 Discovery of Information Concerning an Asset Transferred to an Attorney as Fees for Legal Services](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/JM_S9-120.112.md) - [Justice Manual § 9-120.113 Compelled Disclosure of Confidential Communications During the Course of the Representation](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/JM_S9-120.113.md) --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/JM_S9-120.108. Check the current official text before relying on it. Not legal advice.