Reader’s guide · Florida
Rothstein: why the law firm’s bank accounts mattered
Read the 2013 Rothstein forfeiture appeal through the dispute over mixed bank accounts, the bankruptcy trustee and criminal proceeds.
- Record
- In re Rothstein, Rosenfeldt, Adler, P.A.; United States v. Rothstein, No. 11-10676
- Issued by
- U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit
- Date
- June 12, 2013
- Document
- Court opinion
Reading the record
Scott Rothstein’s guilty plea did not settle every dispute over the money held by his law firm. This appeal concerns the bankruptcy trustee’s challenge to forfeiture of funds in the firm’s bank accounts, where criminal proceeds had been mixed with legitimate receipts.
The Eleventh Circuit held that the funds at issue were not subject to the challenged forfeiture. Read the decision as a dispute arising from criminal forfeiture and third-party property interests, not as a civil forfeiture action or a reversal of Rothstein’s guilty plea.
The useful distinction is between proving a criminal scheme and identifying the particular property that the government can take under the applicable forfeiture rules. The trustee’s role and the court’s tracing analysis make that distinction visible.
Questions to take to the source
- Who is appealing: Rothstein or the bankruptcy trustee?
- How does the opinion distinguish criminal proceeds from money mixed into the law firm’s accounts?
- What property does the ruling address, and what questions remain outside that dispute?
Follow the evidence
Open the source record
These links open the cited documents on their hosts. No account or email is needed to read this guide.
- Rothstein forfeiture appeal — official opinion PDF
Official court PDF; opens on the Eleventh Circuit’s website.
Companion reading for True Crime Florida: The Fort Lauderdale Files. This guide addresses the dated records above; later proceedings may have their own decisions.