HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015595.jpg
909 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
3
Organizations
1
Locations
1
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal filing (conclusion of a motion or memorandum of law)
File Size:
909 KB
Summary
This is the conclusion page of a legal motion filed on behalf of Alan Dershowitz. The document argues that a Confidentiality Order should be modified to allow Dershowitz's counsel to use Virginia Roberts's deposition testimony to prepare his defense, citing Florida case law regarding the requirement that sealing orders be the 'least restrictive' measure available.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Dershowitz | Defendant/Movant |
Legal party seeking modification of a Confidentiality Order to use testimony for his defense.
|
| Roberts | Plaintiff/Witness |
Her deposition testimony is the subject of the sealing dispute.
|
| Plaintiffs | Opposing Party |
Parties arguing for the sealing of the deposition.
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Fla. 2d DCA |
Florida Second District Court of Appeal (cited case law).
|
|
| Florida courts |
Referenced regarding their stance on restrictive options for sealing records.
|
|
| House Oversight Committee |
Source of the document collection (inferred from Bates stamp HOUSE_OVERSIGHT).
|
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Jurisdiction of cited case law.
|
Relationships (1)
Dershowitz is seeking to use Roberts's testimony for his defense against the wishes of Roberts/Plaintiffs.
Key Quotes (3)
"The judge’s statement that he had ‘cogent reasons’ for sealing the records obviously fell short of specifically setting forth the reasons why public access to these deposition was being denied."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015595.jpg
Quote #1
"Roberts and Plaintiffs cannot argue that sealing her deposition in its entirety is “the least restrictive” option"Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015595.jpg
Quote #2
"Because Dershowitz must be able to prepare his defense... the Court should modify the Confidentiality Order to confirm that Dershowitz’s counsel may disclose Roberts’s testimony"Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015595.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,204 characters)
(Fla. 2d DCA 1977) (“The judge’s statement that he had ‘cogent reasons’ for sealing the records obviously fell short of specifically setting forth the reasons why public access to these deposition was being denied.”). Moreover, Roberts and Plaintiffs cannot argue that sealing her deposition in its entirety is “the least restrictive” option, as it is most certainly the most restrictive option and one that Florida courts take very seriously. “[A] closure order must be drawn with particularity and narrowly applied.” Barron, 531 So. 2d at 117.
Here, that requisite “least restrictive” application requires, at a minimum, allowing Dershowitz to use Roberts’s testimony for the limited purposes necessary in the professional judgment of his counsel to represent their client, as a matter of fairness and due process.
CONCLUSION
Because Dershowitz must be able to prepare his defense and any sealing order must be the least restrictive measure available, the Court should modify the Confidentiality Order to confirm that Dershowitz’s counsel may disclose Roberts’s testimony as they deem necessary in their professional judgment in order to represent Dershowitz in this case.
6
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015595
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document