DOJ-OGR-00019456.jpg

620 KB

Extraction Summary

4
People
2
Organizations
0
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
2
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Court order / legal ruling (page 12 of 13)
File Size: 620 KB
Summary

This document is page 12 of a court order filed on September 14, 2020. The Court grants Ghislaine Maxwell's motion to stay the civil action against her in its entirety until her criminal prosecution is complete. The Judge reasons that a partial stay would prejudice the Co-Executors (of the Epstein Estate) by forcing them into duplicative discovery without the ability to depose Maxwell, who is a central figure.

People (4)

Name Role Context
Ghislaine Maxwell Defendant
Described as a 'central figure' in the civil case; subject of a criminal prosecution; her motion for a stay was granted.
Moskowitz Attorney (presumed)
Author of a letter dated 8/27/20 cited in the ruling.
Co-Executors Defendants (Estate Representatives)
Would be prejudiced by a partial stay if they had to conduct discovery without deposing Maxwell first.
Plaintiff Plaintiff
Mentioned as a witness who might be deposed.

Organizations (2)

Name Type Context
Trustees of Plumbers and Pipefitters Nat. Pension Fund
Case cited regarding duplicative discovery efforts (886 F. Supp. at 1141).
The Court
The entity issuing the order and granting the stay.

Timeline (2 events)

2020-09-14
Court grants Maxwell's motion for a stay of the civil action pending the completion of her criminal prosecution.
Court
Future (Pending)
Criminal prosecution against Maxwell
Unknown

Relationships (1)

Ghislaine Maxwell Co-Defendants Co-Executors
Text discusses how a stay for Maxwell affects the Co-Executors' ability to defend themselves.

Key Quotes (2)

"This Court is persuaded that, as Maxwell is a central figure in this civil case, a stay of discovery that applies only to her would prejudice the Co-Executors"
Source
DOJ-OGR-00019456.jpg
Quote #1
"Maxwell’s motion for a stay of this action, in its entirety, pending the completion of the criminal prosecution against her (Dkt. 69) is granted."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00019456.jpg
Quote #2

Full Extracted Text

Complete text extracted from the document (1,723 characters)

Case 1:20-cv-00464-JGK-DGW Document 82 Filed 09/14/20 Page 12 of 13
would unduly prejudice their ability to mount their own defense. (See 8/27/20 Moskowitz Ltr., at 1-2.) Where one defendant is a central figure in an action, and where that individual’s testimony is of key importance, a partial stay can lead to duplicative discovery efforts. Trustees of Plumbers and Pipefitters Nat. Pension Fund, 886 F. Supp. at 1141. This Court is persuaded that, as Maxwell is a central figure in this civil case, a stay of discovery that applies only to her would prejudice the Co-Executors by requiring them to conduct discovery without having the opportunity to depose Maxwell or collect documents in her possession. (See 8/27/20 Moskowitz Ltr., at 1-2.) Further, a partial stay could lead to duplicative depositions, as, once the partial stay is lifted, Maxwell would be entitled to question any witnesses (including Plaintiff) who may have already been deposed during the pendency of the partial stay, and, once evidence is obtained from Maxwell, other parties might also wish to re-depose witnesses. (See id. at 2.)
CONCLUSION
For all of the foregoing reasons, Maxwell’s motion for a stay of this action, in its entirety, pending the completion of the criminal prosecution against her (Dkt. 69) is granted. If, however, the underlying circumstances change over time in a way that could affect this Court’s balancing of the relevant factors, then the parties may bring the changed circumstances to this Court’s attention, and it will then consider whether the stay should continue or be lifted. Absent any further application to this Court to review the stay, the parties are directed to provide this Court
12
DOJ-OGR-00019456

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document