DOJ-OGR-00021749.jpg
609 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
2
Organizations
0
Locations
3
Events
1
Relationships
0
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
609 KB
Summary
This legal document is a preliminary statement in reply for an appeal by Ms. Maxwell. She argues that her prosecution was barred by a non-prosecution agreement (NPA) and that the District Court erred in its handling of ambiguities related to it. Additionally, she contends the court abused its discretion regarding Juror 50, citing the juror's false answers on a questionnaire and concealed past trauma as grounds for a valid challenge for cause.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Ms. Maxwell | Appellant |
The central figure in the document, making legal arguments in her appeal.
|
| Juror 50 | Juror |
A juror whose conduct and answers on a questionnaire are being challenged by Ms. Maxwell as grounds for appeal.
|
| Annabi | Party in a cited legal case |
Mentioned in the legal citation "U.S. v. Annabi, 771 F.2d 670 (2d Cir. 1985)".
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| District Court | Judiciary |
The court whose reliance on a legal precedent and whose findings concerning Juror 50 are being challenged by Ms. Maxw...
|
| Government | Government agency |
Mentioned in the context of its witnesses whose experiences were analogous to those of Juror 50.
|
Timeline (3 events)
Ms. Maxwell's prosecution, which she argues was barred by a non-prosecution agreement (NPA).
District Court
Relationships (1)
Ms. Maxwell is appealing the District Court's decisions, arguing that its reliance on a case was an error and its findings about Juror 50 were an abuse of discretion.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document