The form of the styling of this case—the defendant being an object, rather than a legal person—is because this is a jurisdiction "in rem" (power over objects) case, rather than the more familiar "in personam" (over persons) case. In current US legal practice, "in rem" is most widely used in the area of asset forfeiture, frequently in relation to controlled substances offenses. In rem forfeiture cases allow property (in this case, $124,700 in cash) to be directly sued by and forfeited to the government, without either just compensation or the possessor (and presumptive owner) being convicted of a crime.