DOJ-OGR-00020375.jpg

598 KB

Extraction Summary

4
People
3
Organizations
0
Locations
2
Events
2
Relationships
2
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Legal document
File Size: 598 KB
Summary

This legal document is a page from a court order denying a renewed motion by an individual named Maxwell for temporary release from confinement. The court relies on the 'law of the case' doctrine, stating that Maxwell has not provided a compelling reason, such as new evidence or a change in law, to justify reversing its prior decision. The court also dismisses Maxwell's arguments concerning a recent letter briefing and a written order by Judge Nathan, affirming the previous finding that Maxwell is a flight risk.

People (4)

Name Role Context
Maxwell Litigant
Subject of a renewed motion for temporary release, which the court is denying.
Plugh Party in a cited case
Mentioned in the case citation 'United States v. Plugh, 648 F.3d 118, 123 (2d Cir. 2011)'.
Tenzer Party in a cited case
Mentioned in the case citation 'United States v. Tenzer, 213 F.3d 34, 39 (2d Cir. 2000)'.
Judge Nathan Judge
Mentioned as having issued a recent written order and finding that Maxwell poses a flight risk.

Organizations (3)

Name Type Context
this Court Judicial body
The court authoring the decision, adhering to its prior ruling.
District Court Judicial body
The court before which an 'additional letter briefing' was submitted.
MDC Detention facility
Mentioned in the context of 'nighttime security checks' which were the subject of a letter briefing.

Timeline (2 events)

Maxwell filed a renewed motion for temporary release.
this Court
Judge Nathan issued a written order finding Maxwell poses a flight risk and that temporary release is not warranted.
District Court

Relationships (2)

Maxwell Litigant-Court this Court
Maxwell submitted a motion to the Court, and the Court is issuing a decision on that motion.
Maxwell Litigant-Judge Judge Nathan
Judge Nathan made a finding that Maxwell poses a flight risk, which is being discussed in the current document.

Key Quotes (2)

"As a general matter, this Court will adhere to its own decision at an earlier stage of the litigation."
Source
— this Court (Citing the 'law of the case doctrine' from United States v. Plugh to explain its decision not to reverse a prior ruling.)
DOJ-OGR-00020375.jpg
Quote #1
"We have stated that we will not depart from this sound policy absent cogent or compelling reasons."
Source
— this Court (Quoting from United States v. Tenzer to reinforce the high bar for reversing a prior decision.)
DOJ-OGR-00020375.jpg
Quote #2

Full Extracted Text

Complete text extracted from the document (1,393 characters)

Case 21-58, Document 92, 05/27/2021, 3109708, Page17 of 24
of confinement do not warrant temporary release. Nothing in Maxwell’s renewed motion alters that conclusion.
32. “As a general matter, this Court will adhere to its own decision at an earlier stage of the litigation.” United States v. Plugh, 648 F.3d 118, 123 (2d Cir. 2011). The “law of the case doctrine is subject to limited exceptions made for compelling reasons,” such as where there is “an intervening change of controlling law, the availability of new evidence, or the need to correct a clear error or prevent manifest injustice.” Id. at 123–24; see also United States v. Tenzer, 213 F.3d 34, 39 (2d Cir. 2000) (“We have stated that we will not depart from this sound policy absent cogent or compelling reasons.”). Maxwell has offered no persuasive reason, let alone a “compelling” reason, Plugh, 648 F.3d at 123, for this Court to reverse its prior decision.
33. The only new events that Maxwell cites as justification for her request that this Court reverse itself is additional letter briefing before the District Court regarding MDC’s nighttime security checks. Nothing about that briefing or Judge Nathan’s most recent written order suggests that Judge Nathan clearly erred when finding Maxwell poses a flight risk or abused her discretion when determining that temporary release is not warranted.
17
DOJ-OGR-00020375

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document