This document is page 5 of a rough draft transcript from a deposition or hearing bearing a House Oversight Bates stamp. A former judge is being questioned about their current pro bono work through the University of Utah and their admission *pro hac vice* in the Southern District of Florida. The questioning focuses on the witness's past judicial conduct, specifically whether they ever struck pleadings for being impertinent or scandalous; the witness recalls referring attorneys to the Bar in two such instances rather than striking pleadings immediately.
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Witness (Unidentified) | Witness/Former Judge |
Answering questions about past conduct as a judge and current pro bono work; admitted pro hac vice in the Southern Di...
|
| Interviewer (Unidentified) | Legal Counsel/Interviewer |
Questioning the witness regarding legal procedures and past judicial decisions.
|
| Dodge | Unclear (likely litigant or associate) |
Mentioned in the first sentence fragment, possibly a party in a case.
|
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| University of Utah |
Institution through which the witness is performing pro bono work.
|
|
| Southern District of Florida |
Federal court jurisdiction where the witness was admitted pro hac vice.
|
|
| The Bar |
Legal association to which the witness referred lawyers for inappropriate pleadings.
|
|
| House Oversight Committee |
Implied by the Bates stamp 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT'.
|
"As a judge, did you ever strike a party's pleadings because they were impertinent, scandalous, irrelevant?"Source
"I mean what I did, I think, there were two cases where I referred people to the Bar which was a way of dealing with the pleadings that were inappropriate in those cases."Source
Complete text extracted from the document (1,313 characters)
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document