DOJ-OGR-00019356.jpg
700 KB
Extraction Summary
2
People
3
Organizations
0
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal brief / court filing (appellate)
File Size:
700 KB
Summary
This page from a legal brief (Case 20-3061, dated Sept 16, 2020) argues that Ghislaine Maxwell's appeal should be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The text contends that Judge Nathan's refusal to modify a Protective Order is not an 'immediately appealable collateral order' and does not fall under categories allowing prejudgment appeals in criminal cases.
People (2)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Maxwell | Defendant/Appellant |
Ghislaine Maxwell; the subject of the appeal which the document argues should be dismissed.
|
| Judge Nathan | District Judge |
Issued the Order declining to modify the Protective Order which is the subject of the appeal.
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Supreme Court |
Cited for legal precedents (Midland Asphalt, Van Cauwenberghe, Mohawk, etc.).
|
|
| DOJ |
Department of Justice; indicated by the Bates stamp 'DOJ-OGR'.
|
|
| This Court |
The court hearing the appeal (likely 2nd Circuit based on context of Maxwell case).
|
Relationships (1)
Maxwell is appealing Judge Nathan's order regarding a protective order.
Key Quotes (3)
"Accordingly, this Court does not have jurisdiction to review the Order, and Maxwell’s appeal should be dismissed."Source
DOJ-OGR-00019356.jpg
Quote #1
"Judge Nathan’s Order declining to modify the Protective Order in this criminal case is not subject to interlocutory appeal."Source
DOJ-OGR-00019356.jpg
Quote #2
"the Order does not meet the third criterion of the standard for identifying immediately appealable collateral orders"Source
DOJ-OGR-00019356.jpg
Quote #3
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document