DOJ-OGR-00010755.jpg
825 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
4
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
2
Relationships
6
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
825 KB
Summary
This legal document argues against a defendant's request to seal a motion for a new trial, which was based on a juror's alleged failure to properly answer a questionnaire. The author asserts the public's common law right of access to judicial documents, citing legal precedents like 'Amodeo' and 'Lugosch' to argue that the defendant has not met the high standard for secrecy. The document suggests that limited redactions, rather than a complete seal, would be a more appropriate course of action.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Amodeo | Party in a cited legal case |
Mentioned in the case citation 'United States v. Amodeo' ('Amodeo I').
|
| Lugosch | Party in a cited legal case |
Mentioned in the case citation 'Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. v. Onondaga' and the 'Lugosch standard'.
|
| Bernstein | Party in a cited legal case |
Mentioned in the case citation 'Bernstein v. Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossman LLP'.
|
Organizations (4)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| United States | Government agency |
Party in the cited case 'United States v. Amodeo'.
|
| Pyramid Co. | Company |
Party in the cited case 'Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. v. Onondaga'.
|
| Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossman LLP | Law firm |
Party in the cited case 'Bernstein v. Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossman LLP'.
|
| The Court | Government agency |
The judicial body asked to keep a motion under seal and whose assessment is informed by the motion.
|
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Party in the cited case 'Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. v. Onondaga'.
|
Relationships (2)
The Defendant filed a motion with the Court and asked the Court to rule on it.
Defendant
→
Legal
→
juror
The Defendant's motion for a new trial appears to be based on the juror's answers (or lack thereof) on a questionnaire.
Key Quotes (6)
"flew through"Source
— juror
(The juror's description of how he completed the questionnaire.)
DOJ-OGR-00010755.jpg
Quote #1
"not recall being asked"Source
— juror
(The juror's response when asked about a specific question on the questionnaire.)
DOJ-OGR-00010755.jpg
Quote #2
"judicial document"Source
— Legal term
(A term defining items to which the common law presumption of access attaches.)
DOJ-OGR-00010755.jpg
Quote #3
"relevant to the performance of judicial function and useful in the judicial process."Source
— United States v. Amodeo
(The definition of a 'judicial document' cited from a legal case.)
DOJ-OGR-00010755.jpg
Quote #4
"substantive legal rights"Source
— Legal term
(Used to describe the rights affected by court verdicts and orders, strengthening the presumption of public access.)
DOJ-OGR-00010755.jpg
Quote #5
"countervailing factors"Source
— Legal term
(Factors that must be shown to outweigh the public's right to monitor judicial proceedings in order to overcome the presumption of access.)
DOJ-OGR-00010755.jpg
Quote #6
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document