DOJ-OGR-00019683.jpg

570 KB
View Original

Extraction Summary

11
People
4
Organizations
3
Locations
1
Events
3
Relationships
1
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Legal document (court order/summary order)
File Size: 570 KB
Summary

This document is the first page of a Summary Order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, dated October 19, 2020. It lists the judicial panel (Judges Cabranes, Pooler, and Raggi) presiding over the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 20-3061-cr). It identifies the legal counsel for both the United States (Appellee) and Maxwell (Defendant-Appellant).

People (11)

Name Role Context
Ghislaine Maxwell Defendant-Appellant
The defendant in the criminal case appealing a decision.
José A. Cabranes Circuit Judge
Presiding judge on the panel.
Rosemary S. Pooler Circuit Judge
Presiding judge on the panel.
Reena Raggi Circuit Judge
Presiding judge on the panel.
Lara Pomerantz Assistant United States Attorney
Counsel for the Appellee (USA).
Maurene Comey Assistant United States Attorney
Counsel for the Appellee (on the brief).
Alison Moe Assistant United States Attorney
Counsel for the Appellee (on the brief).
Karl Metzner Assistant United States Attorney
Counsel for the Appellee (on the brief).
Audrey Strauss Acting United States Attorney
Representing the Southern District of New York.
Adam Mueller Defense Attorney
Counsel for Defendant-Appellant Ghislaine Maxwell.
Ty Gee Defense Attorney
Counsel for Defendant-Appellant (on the brief).

Timeline (1 events)

2020-10-19
Summary Order issued by the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit regarding United States v. Maxwell
Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, New York, NY

Relationships (3)

Ghislaine Maxwell Legal Adversaries United States
Case caption: United States, Appellee v. Ghislaine Maxwell, Defendant-Appellant
Adam Mueller Attorney-Client Ghislaine Maxwell
Listed as 'FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT'
Lara Pomerantz Attorney-Client/Representation United States
Listed as 'FOR APPELLEE'

Key Quotes (1)

"Rulings by summary order do not have precedential effect."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00019683.jpg
Quote #1

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document