Sample Answer to Complaint for Forfeiture
Civil asset forfeiture attorneys in Florida represent individuals who want to contest the forfeiture. The attorney will file an answer to the complaint on behalf of a “Claimant” who has a proprietary interest in the property seized.
The rules that apply depend on whether the forfeiture follows state or federal law. The forfeiture usually follows state law when a local or state agency seizes the property. In those cases, the claimant will be served with a notice of seizure that references the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act and giving 15 days to file a demand for an adversarial preliminary hearing (APH). Federal forfeitures typically fall under the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000 (CAFRA).
In forfeitures under state law, the attorney must file the answer within 20 days of when their client is served with the complaint. The deadlines in civil asset forfeiture cases are unforgiving, so Claimants must act quickly. If a Claimant misses a deadline, the seizing agency might obtain a “default judgment” which might be difficult or impossible to set aside.
We listed a sample answer to a complaint for forfeiture under the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act below. Before you take any action, contact an experienced civil asset forfeiture attorney to find out whether you should file an answer to the complaint for forfeiture, and if so, whether you should hire an attorney to assist you.
This sample is provided for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon. The information you provide in the forfeiture proceeding might be used against you in a criminal proceeding. For example, the information might be turned over to a prosecutor who might charge you with a crime.
For individuals who are telling the truth, did not commit a crime, or are innocent owners or have another viable defense, it makes sense to talk with an attorney about the best ways to answer the complaint for forfeiture.
This sample applies only if a law enforcement agency at the state or local level seized your property and provided you with a notice of seizure explaining your right to an adversarial preliminary hearing under the Florida Contraband Act. If a federal agency seized your property or adopted the forfeiture, then your answer would look different since it would follow the CAFRA provisions.
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE ____ JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR _____ COUNTY, FLORIDA
CIRCUIT CIVIL
IN RE: FORFEITURE OF: CASE NO.: ______________
[[describe property as listed in complaint’s caption]]
_____________________________________________________________________________________/
THE CLAIMANT’S ANSWER TO THE VERIFIED COMPLAINT
Claimant, ______________ (hereinafter “Claimant”), through his undersigned attorney, hereby files this CLAIMANT’S ANSWER TO VERIFIED COMPLAINT. Claimant is the owner of the property seized by ______ on [date], which is described as __________________ (hereinafter “seized property). The seized property was confiscated by ______________, a local or state law enforcement agency in Florida.
I. CLAIMANT’S ANSWER
Claimant responds to the allegations in each corresponding paragraph of the Complaint as follows:
- Admit paragraph 1 of the Complaint.
- Admit paragraph 2 of the Complaint.
- Admit paragraph 3 of the Complaint.
- Paragraph 4 sets forth a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed required, the allegations of this paragraph are denied.
- Paragraph 5 sets forth a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed required, the allegations of this paragraph are denied.
- Deny paragraph 6 of the Complaint.
- Deny paragraph 7 of the Complaint.
- Paragraph 8 sets forth a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed required, the allegations of this paragraph are denied.
[Note: Your attorney will read the complaint and decide whether to admit or deny each paragraph. Obviously, the responses to paragraph 1-8 are just an example of what it might look like.]
II. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Claimant hereby demands a trial by jury.
III. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
A. FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Plaintiff’s Complaint does not comply with the requirement of Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.110(b) to state a cause of action that contains “a short and plain statement of the ultimate facts showing that the pleader is entitled to relief….” The Complaint contains no sufficient allegations concerning the facts allegedly supporting forfeiture of the defendant currency.
B. SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Forfeiture of the defendant currency is barred by the prohibition against excessive fines set forth in the Excessive Fines Clause of the 8th Amendment to the United States Constitution. Austin v. United States, 509 U.S. 602, 113 S.Ct. 2801, 125 L.Ed. 2nd 488 (1993). As was stated in Agresta v. City of Maitland, 159 So.3d 876 (Fla. at 2015) “because provisions of the Act (referring to the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act) are similar to the provision of 21 U.S.C. Section 881(a)(4), the Austin analysis applies. See also In Re: Forfeiture of 1990 Chevrolet Blazer, 684 So.2d 197, 198 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1996); In Re: One 1993 Dodge Intrepid, 645 So.2d 551, 551-52 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1994). In regards to the Constitutional issue raised, “to determine if a forfeiture is proportional, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, like most Federal courts, has noted that courts must ask: “given the offense for which the owner is being punished, is the fine imposed by civil forfeiture excessive?” Agresta, at 877.
C. THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The seized property is not from any prohibited source and not subject to forfeiture.
D. FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The property is not subject to seizure and forfeiture.
E. FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The forfeiture is barred by the prohibition of depriving citizens of property without due process of law as provided for in the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
F. SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The Claimant is an innocent owner who did not know and should not have known after a reasonable inquiry, that the property was being employed or was likely to be employed in criminal activity.
M. SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Claimant is entitled to reasonable attorney fees and costs per statute.
N. EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Claimant reserves the right to amend.
[[the remaining defense will not apply in most cases]]
H. NINETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The court is without either in rem jurisdiction or subject matter jurisdiction because….
I. TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
A stale seizure warrant was served more than 10 days after it was issued…
J. ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The plaintiff failed to file an affidavit for a probable cause determination within 10 days of the seizure….
K. TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The plaintiff failed to notice the adversarial preliminary hearing to be held within 10 days or as soon as practical thereafter as required by Section 932.703(3)(a), Florida Statutes, after receiving the request from the Claimant served via U.S. Mail return receipt requested to the address listed in the notice of seizure.
L. FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The plaintiff failed to file the complaint for forfeiture within 45 days of the seizure.
IV. CONCLUSION
WHEREFORE, Claimant hereby demands that the Court deny Plaintiff’s claim for forfeiture of the seized property; order the seized property be returned to Claimant; and enter such additional relief as the Court deems just and proper.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been furnished to [name of the agency’s attorney], Attorney for the Petitioner, via Electronic Mail, [[email address for agency attorney list in complaint]], on the ___ day of [[month]], 2025.
Respectfully submitted,
[[insert signature line]]
Read more about the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act and civil asset forfeiture proceedings in state court.
This article was last updated on Monday, October 6, 2025.