DOJ-OGR-00010126.jpg

757 KB
View Original

Extraction Summary

4
People
6
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
2
Relationships
2
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Legal declaration (court filing)
File Size: 757 KB
Summary

This document is the first page of a declaration by Stephen Gillers, a legal ethics professor at NYU, filed on April 6, 2012, in the case United States v. Paul M. Daugerdas. Gillers outlines his qualifications and states he was asked to address whether attorneys for the firm Brune & Richard met their ethical obligations regarding the disclosure of a 'July 21 letter' and an investigation into 'Juror No. 1.' The document appears to be part of a larger Department of Justice release (DOJ-OGR stamp), though the specific text on this page relates to the Daugerdas tax fraud case rather than explicitly mentioning Epstein.

People (4)

Name Role Context
Stephen Gillers Declarant / Law Professor
Expert on legal ethics submitting the declaration.
Paul M. Daugerdas Defendant
Named defendant in the case caption.
William H. Pauley, III Judge
Presiding judge listed in the caption (The Honorable).
Juror No. 1 Juror
Subject of an investigation regarding disclosure obligations.

Organizations (6)

Name Type Context
United States District Court Southern District of New York
Court where the document was filed.
New York University School of Law
Employer of Stephen Gillers.
American Bar Association
Professional organization mentioned in Gillers' qualifications.
ABA's Center for Professional Responsibility
Organization where Gillers is active.
Brune & Richard
Law firm whose attorneys' ethical obligations are being questioned.
Department of Justice (DOJ)
Implied by the footer stamp 'DOJ-OGR'.

Timeline (2 events)

2012-02-16
Court posed a specific question regarding ethical obligations.
Court
The Court
2012-04-06
Document filed with the court.
Southern District of New York

Locations (1)

Location Context
Location of the District Court and NYU.

Relationships (2)

I am a law professor at New York University School of Law
Brune & Richard Investigative Juror No. 1
investigation into Juror No. 1

Key Quotes (2)

"whether the attorneys for Brune & Richard involved in this matter would have satisfied their ethical obligations if they failed to disclose the contents of the July 21 letter and their complete investigation into Juror No. 1."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00010126.jpg
Quote #1
"I have been asked, therefore, to address any disclosure duty in March, May, and July of 2011."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00010126.jpg
Quote #2

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document