DOJ-OGR-00019418.jpg
617 KB
Extraction Summary
5
People
2
Organizations
0
Locations
4
Events
2
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
617 KB
Summary
This legal document, part of a court filing, argues that an appeal concerning Judge Nathan's order should proceed. The author contends that the appeal is separate from an ongoing criminal case involving Ms. Maxwell, will not cause delays, and that waiting for the criminal trial to conclude would render the issue moot. The document references a stay on Judge Preska's order to unseal deposition material as a reason for the current proceedings.
People (5)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Judge Nathan | Judge |
Mentioned in relation to an order that is being appealed.
|
| Judge Preska | Judge |
Mentioned for her order unsealing deposition material, which was stayed pending appeal.
|
| Giuffre | Party in a lawsuit |
Mentioned as a party in the case Giuffre v. Maxwell.
|
| Maxwell | Party in a lawsuit |
Mentioned as a party in the case Giuffre v. Maxwell and as Ms. Maxwell, whose request to share information is discussed.
|
| Flanagan | Party in a cited lawsuit |
Mentioned in a legal citation (See Flanagan, 465 U.S. at 268).
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| this Court | government agency |
The court hearing the current appeal, which stayed Judge Preska's order.
|
| 2d Cir. | government agency |
The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, mentioned in a case citation.
|
Timeline (4 events)
Judge Preska's order to unseal deposition material.
An ongoing criminal case which the document argues will not be delayed by the current appeal.
Ms. Maxwell
Relationships (2)
They are opposing parties in the lawsuit 'Giuffre v. Maxwell, No. 20-2413'.
Both are judges whose orders are discussed in the context of the same overarching legal matter involving Ms. Maxwell.
Key Quotes (3)
"independent of the issues to be tried"Source
— Unknown (cited from legal precedent)
(Describing the appeal of Judge Nathan's order in relation to the criminal case.)
DOJ-OGR-00019418.jpg
Quote #1
"validity can[] be adequately reviewed"Source
— Unknown (cited from legal precedent)
(Describing the appeal of Judge Nathan's order.)
DOJ-OGR-00019418.jpg
Quote #2
"societal interest in providing a speedy trial"Source
— Unknown (cited from legal precedent)
(Explaining why interlocutory appeals in criminal cases are generally disfavored.)
DOJ-OGR-00019418.jpg
Quote #3
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document