DOJ-OGR-00002895.jpg
783 KB
Extraction Summary
6
People
3
Organizations
1
Locations
1
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal filing (motion/memorandum of law)
File Size:
783 KB
Summary
This document is page 6 of a legal filing (Document 195) from the Ghislaine Maxwell case (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on April 5, 2021. The Government is arguing that the Court should require notice for all Rule 17(c) subpoenas rather than allowing them to be issued *ex parte* (without notice), citing various legal precedents (Wey, Earls, Skelos, St. Lawrence, Boyle) to support the position that *ex parte* proceedings should only be permitted with a compelling reason. Footnotes clarify the Government's concern regarding financial institutions responding to broad subpoenas for impeachment purposes and state that this request does not apply to subpoenas returnable at trial.
People (6)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| The Government | Prosecution |
Requesting notice of all subpoenas with pretrial return dates.
|
| Wey | Defendant in cited case |
Cited in United States v. Wey regarding ex parte subpoenas.
|
| Earls | Defendant in cited case |
Cited in United States v. Earls.
|
| Skelos | Defendant in cited case |
Cited in United States v. Skelos regarding requiring notice for subpoenas.
|
| St. Lawrence | Defendant in cited case |
Cited in United States v. St. Lawrence.
|
| Boyle | Defendant in cited case |
Cited in United States v. Boyle.
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| United States District Court Southern District of New York |
Jurisdiction where the filing and cited cases occurred (S.D.N.Y.).
|
|
| Department of Justice |
Indicated by footer 'DOJ-OGR'.
|
|
| Second Circuit Court of Appeals |
Cited as '2d Cir.'.
|
Timeline (1 events)
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Southern District of New York
|
Relationships (1)
Government
→
Legal Adversaries
→
Defense
Implicit in the motion requesting notice of subpoenas to prevent ex parte actions.
Key Quotes (3)
"Accordingly, the Government respectfully requests notice of all subpoenas with pretrial return dates issued or sought to be issued under Rule 17(c)."Source
DOJ-OGR-00002895.jpg
Quote #1
"When courts have considered the issue, however, many have directed that the parties should give each other notice of Rule 17(c) subpoenas unless a party can justify proceeding ex parte."Source
DOJ-OGR-00002895.jpg
Quote #2
"For example, a financial institution may lack sufficient knowledge about the case or motivation to expend the resources to move to quash what appears to be a routine subpoena..."Source
DOJ-OGR-00002895.jpg
Quote #3
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document