DOJ-OGR-00002980.jpg

745 KB

Extraction Summary

1
People
3
Organizations
3
Locations
1
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Court filing / legal memorandum
File Size: 745 KB
Summary

This document is page 46 of a court filing (Document 204) from the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on April 16, 2021. The text presents legal arguments refuting the defendant's claim that she has standing to enforce a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) as a third-party beneficiary. It cites previous case law to argue that third-party standing principles from contract law do not necessarily apply to plea agreements.

People (1)

Name Role Context
The Defendant Defendant
Refers to Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE); arguing she has standing to enforce the NPA.

Organizations (3)

Name Type Context
Florida West Int’l Airways, Inc.
Cited in case law United States v. Florida West Int’l Airways, Inc.
CFW Const. Co.
Cited in case law United States v. CFW Const. Co.
Department of Justice (DOJ)
Indicated by Bates stamp DOJ-OGR-00002980

Timeline (1 events)

2021-04-16
Filing of Document 204 in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE
Federal Court

Locations (3)

Location Context
Southern District of Florida (cited in case law)
Northern District of Ohio (cited in case law)
District of South Carolina (cited in case law)

Relationships (1)

The Defendant Legal Claim NPA (Non-Prosecution Agreement)
defendant relies upon three district court decisions... to enforce the NPA

Key Quotes (3)

"third-party beneficiaries have no contractual right to enforce plea agreements."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00002980.jpg
Quote #1
"the defendant has failed to establish that she is a third party beneficiary of the NPA."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00002980.jpg
Quote #2
"In order to establish that she has enforceable rights under the NPA, the defendant must show that"
Source
DOJ-OGR-00002980.jpg
Quote #3

Full Extracted Text

Complete text extracted from the document (2,246 characters)

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 Filed 04/16/21 Page 46 of 239
respects from those underlying contract law, the district court concluded that “third-party
beneficiaries have no contractual right to enforce plea agreements.” Id. at *3-4. The court
reasoned, “[t]he right to enforce a plea deal does not exist for its own sake; rather, it is a means to
achieve fairness in plea bargaining.” Id. at *4. That is because a defendant has the right to enforce
his plea agreement, and “enforcement by third parties adds nothing to protecting the defendant’s
right.” Id. The same holds true here.
In support of her claim that she has standing to enforce the NPA, the defendant relies upon
three district court decisions, none of which analyzed the threshold question of whether third party
standing concepts from contract law apply to plea agreements. In United States v. Florida West
Int’l Airways, Inc., 853 F. Supp. 2d 1209, 1228 (S.D. Fla. 2012), the district court applied the third
party beneficiary doctrine to a former airline employee based on a prior plea agreement with the
airline that immunized, among others, current and former employees of the airline and its
subsidiaries. In its analysis, however, the court applied the doctrine without analyzing the question
of whether third party beneficiary standing principles apply to plea agreements. Id. For similar
reasons, the defendant’s reliance on United States v. El-Sadig, 133 F. Supp. 2d 600, 608-09 (N.D.
Ohio 2001) is misplaced. In that case, the court permitted a third party to invoke a plea agreement,
but it did not analyze or address whether third party standing rules apply to plea agreements. Id.
Likewise, in United States v. CFW Const. Co., 583 F. Supp. 197, 203 (D.S.C. 1984), the court
applied the third party beneficiary doctrine, but relied solely on contracts treatises for support, and
did not analyze whether that doctrine should be applied to plea agreements.
In any event, even if third party beneficiaries had standing to enforce federal plea
agreements, the defendant has failed to establish that she is a third party beneficiary of the NPA.
In order to establish that she has enforceable rights under the NPA, the defendant must show that
19
DOJ-OGR-00002980

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document