HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013383.jpg
1.83 MB
Extraction Summary
8
People
3
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
5
Relationships
4
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal motion/memorandum (summary judgment argument)
File Size:
1.83 MB
Summary
This document is page 14 of a legal filing arguing that an attorney named Edwards is entitled to summary judgment against claims made by Jeffrey Epstein. The text asserts that Edwards had a sound legal basis to pursue discovery and testimony from high-profile individuals—including Donald Trump, Bill Clinton, Alan Dershowitz, David Copperfield, and Bill Richardson—regarding Epstein's abuse of minor girls. It specifically notes that these individuals were considered 'friends' of Epstein believed to possess relevant information.
People (8)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Edwards | Defendant/Attorney |
Legal party seeking summary judgment; accused by Epstein of improperly pursuing discovery.
|
| Jeffrey Epstein | Plaintiff/Subject |
Alleged that Edwards improperly pursued discovery from his friends regarding sexual assault cases.
|
| Donald Trump | Witness/Associate |
Identified as having relevant and discoverable information regarding Epstein.
|
| Alan Dershowitz | Witness/Associate |
Harvard Law Professor; identified as having relevant and discoverable information regarding Epstein.
|
| Bill Clinton | Witness/Associate |
Former President; identified as having relevant and discoverable information regarding Epstein.
|
| Tommy Mottola | Witness/Associate |
Former Sony Record executive; noted that Edwards was NOT the attorney who noticed his deposition.
|
| David Copperfield | Witness/Associate |
Illusionist; identified as having relevant and discoverable information regarding Epstein.
|
| Bill Richardson | Witness/Associate |
Former New Mexico Governor; named on Edwards' witness list based on sound legal basis.
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Harvard Law |
Affiliated with Alan Dershowitz
|
|
| Sony Record |
Affiliated with Tommy Mottola
|
|
| House Oversight Committee |
Implied by Bates stamp 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013383'
|
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Associated with Governor Bill Richardson
|
Relationships (5)
Described in document as one of Epstein's 'close friends' or 'friends' possessing discoverable information.
Described in document as one of Epstein's 'close friends' or 'friends' possessing discoverable information.
Described in document as one of Epstein's 'close friends' or 'friends' possessing discoverable information.
Described in document as one of Epstein's 'close friends' or 'friends' possessing discoverable information.
Described in document as one of Epstein's 'close friends' or 'friends' possessing discoverable information.
Key Quotes (4)
"Edwards is Entitled to Summary Judgment to the Extent His Claim is Based On Pursuit of Discovery Concerning Epstein’s Friends Because All Such Efforts Were Reasonably Calculated to Lead to Relevant and Admissible Testimony About Epstein’s Abuse of Minor Girls."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013383.jpg
Quote #1
"With regard to Donald Trump, Edwards had sound legal basis for believing Mr. Trump had relevant and discoverable information."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013383.jpg
Quote #2
"With regard to former President Bill Clinton, Edwards had sound legal basis for believing former President Clinton had relevant and discoverable information."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013383.jpg
Quote #3
"With regard to former Sony Record executive Tommy Mottola, Edwards was not the attorney that noticed Mr. Mottola’s deposition."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013383.jpg
Quote #4
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,118 characters)
4. Edwards is Entitled to Summary Judgment to the Extent His Claim is Based On Pursuit of Discovery Concerning Epstein’s Friends Because All Such Efforts Were Reasonably Calculated to Lead to Relevant and Admissible Testimony About Epstein’s Abuse of Minor Girls.
Epstein has also alleged that Edwards improperly pursued discovery from some his close friends. Such discovery, Epstein claims, was improper because Edwards knew that these individuals lacked any discoverable information about the sexual assault cases against Epstein.
Here again, Edwards is entitled to summary judgment, as each of the friends of Epstein were reasonably believed to possess discoverable information. The undisputed facts show the following with regard to each of the persons raised in Epstein’s complaint:
• With regard to Donald Trump, Edwards had sound legal basis for believing Mr. Trump had relevant and discoverable information. See Statement of Undisputed Facts.
• With regard to Alan Dershowitz (Harvard Law Professor), Edwards had sound legal basis for believing Mr. Dershowitz had relevant and discoverable information. See Statement of Undisputed Facts.
• With regard to former President Bill Clinton, Edwards had sound legal basis for believing former President Clinton had relevant and discoverable information. See Statement of Undisputed Facts.
• With regard to former Sony Record executive Tommy Mottola, Edwards was not the attorney that noticed Mr. Mottola’s deposition. See Statement of Undisputed Facts.
• With regard to illusionist David Copperfield, Edwards had sound legal basis for believing Mr. Copperfield had relevant and discoverable information. See Statement of Undisputed Facts.
• With regard to former New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, Edwards had sound legal basis for naming Former New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson on his witness list. See Statement of Undisputed Facts.
It is worth noting that the standard for discovery is a very liberal one. To notice someone for a deposition, of course, it is not required that the person deposed actually end up producing
14
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013383
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document