Bennis v. Michigan
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued November 29, 1995 Decided March 4, 1996
Full case name	Tina B. Bennis v. Michigan
Citations	516 U.S. 442 (more) 116 S. Ct. 994; 134 L. Ed. 2d 68
Case history
Prior	Mich ex rel. Prosecutor v. Bennis, 447 Mich. 719, 527 N.W.2d 483 (1994)
Holding
The forfeiture order did not offend the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment or the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment.
Court membership
Chief Justice William Rehnquist Associate Justices John P. Stevens · Sandra Day O'Connor Antonin Scalia · Anthony Kennedy David Souter · Clarence Thomas Ruth Bader Ginsburg · Stephen Breyer
Case opinions
Majority	Rehnquist, joined by O'Connor, Scalia, Thomas, Ginsburg
Concurrence	Thomas
Concurrence	Ginsburg
Dissent	Stevens, joined by Souter, Breyer
Dissent	Kennedy

Bennis v. Michigan, 516 U.S. 442 (1996), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court, which held that the innocent owner defense is not constitutionally mandated by Fourteenth Amendment Due Process in cases of civil forfeiture.

Background

Tina B. Bennis was a joint owner, with her husband, of an automobile. Detroit police arrested her husband, John Bennis, after observing him engaged in a sexual act with a prostitute in the automobile while it was parked on a Detroit city street. In declaring the automobile forfeit as a public nuisance under Michigan's statutory abatement scheme, the trial court permitted no offset for petitioner's interest despite her lack of knowledge of her husband's activity. The Michigan Court of Appeals reversed but was, in turn, reversed by the Michigan Supreme Court, which concluded, among other things, that Michigan's failure to provide an innocent owner defense was without federal constitutional consequence under this Court's decisions.^{[citation needed]}