DOJ-OGR-00019620.jpg
635 KB
Extraction Summary
2
People
1
Organizations
0
Locations
3
Events
1
Relationships
5
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
635 KB
Summary
This document is a page from a legal filing that describes a court order issued by Judge Nathan on September 2, 2020. The order denied a motion from Maxwell, finding her arguments for using criminal discovery materials in her civil cases to be vague and unsubstantiated. The document also notes that Maxwell subsequently filed an appeal of this order on September 4, 2020, and a motion to consolidate the appeal on September 10, 2020.
People (2)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Judge Nathan | Judge |
Issued an Order on September 2, 2020, denying Maxwell's motion.
|
| Maxwell | Litigant |
Her motion was denied by Judge Nathan, and she subsequently filed an appeal.
|
Organizations (1)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Government | government agency |
Mentioned in the phrase "the Government’s letter in opposition to her motion."
|
Relationships (1)
Judge Nathan is the judge who issued an order denying a motion filed by Maxwell in a legal case.
Key Quotes (5)
"fourteen-single spaced pages of heated rhetoric"Source
— Judge Nathan
(A description from Judge Nathan's Order characterizing Maxwell's motion.)
DOJ-OGR-00019620.jpg
Quote #1
"no more than vague, speculative, and conclusory assertions"Source
— Judge Nathan
(Judge Nathan's finding on what Maxwell offered as justification for needing criminal discovery materials in her civil cases.)
DOJ-OGR-00019620.jpg
Quote #2
"coherent explanation"Source
— Judge Nathan
(What Judge Nathan concluded was absent from Maxwell's argument about the relevance of the criminal discovery materials.)
DOJ-OGR-00019620.jpg
Quote #3
"plainly"Source
— Judge Nathan
(Used to describe how Maxwell failed to establish good cause to modify the Protective Order.)
DOJ-OGR-00019620.jpg
Quote #4
"remain[ed] in the dark as to why this information will be relevant"Source
— Judge Nathan
(Describing the court's perspective on the relevance of the information to the civil cases.)
DOJ-OGR-00019620.jpg
Quote #5
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,612 characters)
Case 20-3061, Document 82, 10/02/2020, 2944267, Page13 of 37
7
opportunity to do so in her pretrial motions in the criminal case before Judge Nathan. (A. 93-94).
D. Judge Nathan's Order
On September 2, 2020, Judge Nathan issued the Order denying Maxwell's motion. (A. 99-103). In that Order, Judge Nathan noted that despite “fourteen-single spaced pages of heated rhetoric,” Maxwell had offered “no more than vague, speculative, and conclusory assertions” regarding why the criminal discovery materials were necessary to fair adjudication of her civil cases. (A. 101). Judge Nathan concluded that absent any “coherent explanation” of how the criminal discovery materials related to any argument Maxwell intended to make in civil litigation, Maxwell had “plainly” failed to establish good cause to modify the Protective Order. (A. 101). Further, Judge Nathan noted that the basic facts Maxwell sought to introduce in civil litigation were already made public through the Government’s letter in opposition to her motion. (A. 101-02). Accordingly, even though Judge Nathan “remain[ed] in the dark as to why this information will be relevant” to the courts adjudicating the civil cases, Judge Nathan expressly permitted Maxwell to inform the tribunals overseeing her civil cases, under seal, of the basic factual background regarding the confidential criminal discovery materials at issue. (A. 101-02).
E. Maxwell's Appeal of the Order
On September 4, 2020, Maxwell filed a notice of appeal from the Order. (A. 121-23). On September 10, 2020, Maxwell filed a motion to consolidate this appeal
DOJ-OGR-00019620
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document