DOJ-OGR-00010134.jpg
622 KB
Extraction Summary
4
People
3
Organizations
0
Locations
2
Events
2
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal declaration / expert ethics opinion
File Size:
622 KB
Summary
This document is a page from a legal declaration or expert report authored by Stephen Gillers, an ethics expert. It analyzes a court transcript involving attorney Trzaskoma and the law firm Brune & Richard regarding their investigation of a juror named Catherine Conrad (Juror Number One). Gillers concludes that the lawyers' actions and disclosures to the court were entirely consistent with legal ethics rules.
People (4)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Stephen Gillers | Author / Expert Witness |
Legal ethics expert providing the conclusion that the lawyers actions were consistent with ethics rules.
|
| Trzaskoma | Attorney |
Lawyer quoted in the transcript offering to address a matter regarding a jury consultant in a letter.
|
| Catherine Conrad | Juror / Subject of Inquiry |
Juror Number One; the subject of the investigation by Brune & Richard lawyers.
|
| The Court | Judge |
Presiding over the colloquy regarding the jury consultant.
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Brune & Richard |
Law firm whose lawyers' actions are being evaluated for ethical compliance.
|
|
| DOJ |
Department of Justice (indicated in footer DOJ-OGR).
|
|
| City of Providence |
Cited in a legal precedent (Young v. City of Providence).
|
Timeline (2 events)
Relationships (2)
Gillers writes opinion defending Brune & Richard's ethical conduct.
Lawyers obtained information about Catherine Conrad (Juror).
Key Quotes (3)
"The only thing additional that I would offer your Honor is—well, we can address this in a letter. I think it’s more appropriate."Source
DOJ-OGR-00010134.jpg
Quote #1
"For the reasons stated, my opinion is that the actions of the Brune & Richard lawyers... were entirely consistent with their responsibilities under the lawyer ethics rules."Source
DOJ-OGR-00010134.jpg
Quote #2
"The general rule is that statements must be taken in context, and that related parts of a document must be taken together."Source
DOJ-OGR-00010134.jpg
Quote #3
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document