DOJ-OGR-00019638.jpg
681 KB
Extraction Summary
2
People
2
Organizations
0
Locations
1
Events
2
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
681 KB
Summary
This legal document, part of an appeal, critiques Ghislaine Maxwell's arguments for keeping criminal discovery materials sealed in her civil cases. The author contends that Maxwell has failed to provide a coherent legal basis for her request and did not adequately explain the relevance of the materials to Judge Nathan. Maxwell's concern is that unsealing the deposition material could prevent her from making future arguments to Judge Nathan regarding alleged government misconduct.
People (2)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Maxwell | Litigant |
Subject of the legal arguments, seeking to keep discovery materials sealed in her civil cases.
|
| Judge Nathan | Judge |
Presided over a matter where it was concluded that Maxwell did not provide sufficient explanation for keeping documen...
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Government | government agency |
An opposing party in litigation with Maxwell, who obtained materials she seeks to keep sealed.
|
| Second Circuit | government agency |
Mentioned in the context of a body of law Maxwell alleges the Government circumvented.
|
Timeline (1 events)
Maxwell's appeal regarding the unsealing of discovery materials from a criminal case for use in civil cases.
Second Circuit
Relationships (2)
The document describes them as opposing parties in suppression litigation and other legal matters.
Maxwell is a litigant making arguments before Judge Nathan, who is the presiding judge in one of her cases.
Key Quotes (3)
"furnishe[d] no substantive explanation regarding the relevance of the Documents to decisions to be made in those matters, let alone any explanation of why modifying the protective order in order to allow such disclosure is necessary to ensure the fair adjudication of those matters."Source
— Judge Nathan
(Quoted as Judge Nathan's conclusion regarding Maxwell's failure to justify keeping documents sealed.)
DOJ-OGR-00019638.jpg
Quote #1
"if the deposition material is unsealed, it may foreclose"Source
— Maxwell
(Part of Maxwell's argument that unsealing material would prevent her from making certain arguments to Judge Nathan.)
DOJ-OGR-00019638.jpg
Quote #2
"all [she] seeks in this appeal is the ability to"Source
— Maxwell
(A claim made by Maxwell regarding the purpose of her appeal.)
DOJ-OGR-00019638.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,757 characters)
Case 20-3061, Document 82, 10/02/2020, 2944267, Page31 of 37
25
certain discovery materials would impact the unsealing analysis under First Amendment principles in a civil matter. Even if Maxwell were correct that the way in which the Government obtained the materials was improper—and she is not—that fact would have no bearing on the analysis of whether materials in certain civil cases should be unsealed. Maxwell cites not a single case to support the conclusion that her desire to prevent the Government from raising an inevitable discovery argument in suppression litigation should impact the unsealing analysis in a civil case. She offers no coherent argument for how the criminal discovery materials would impact any decision in a civil case.
At bottom, it remains unclear what legal argument Maxwell wishes to make in her civil cases based on the criminal discovery materials she has identified or what relevance those materials have to the litigation of those civil matters. Accordingly, Judge Nathan did not abuse her discretion when concluding that Maxwell “furnishe[d] no substantive explanation regarding the relevance of the Documents to decisions to be made in those matters, let alone any explanation of why modifying the protective order in order to allow such disclosure is necessary to ensure the fair adjudication of those matters.” (A. 101).
In pressing for a different result here, Maxwell argues that “if the deposition material is unsealed, it may foreclose” any of her arguments to Judge Nathan about the perjury counts or other remedies available to Maxwell based on the Government’s alleged circumvention of Second Circuit law. (Br. 27). Maxwell claims that “all [she] seeks in this appeal is the ability to
DOJ-OGR-00019638
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document