Trzaskoma
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
organization
The Court
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Brune
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Edelstein
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Brune
|
Business associate |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-11-07 | Telephone conference | The Court held a telephone conference to inquire about the defendants' knowledge of facts concern... | N/A | View |
| 2012-02-15 | N/A | Court proceeding date listed in header. | Southern District (likely S... | View |
| 2011-05-01 | Meeting | Trzaskoma discussed the issue of Juror Conrad's identity with Brune and Edelstein. All three conc... | N/A | View |
| 2011-05-01 | Investigation | Following a note from Juror Conrad, Trzaskoma and others at her firm re-examined the issue, findi... | N/A | View |
| 2011-05-01 | N/A | Juror Conrad sends a note regarding vicarious liability; lawyers reinvestigate potential identity... | Court/Office | View |
| 2011-03-01 | Investigation | Trzaskoma discovered a 2010 court order suspending a Bronx lawyer with the same name as Juror Con... | N/A | View |
| 2011-03-01 | N/A | Trzaskoma discovers a 2010 court order suspending a Bronx lawyer named Conrad; lawyers decide to ... | Court/Office | View |
| 0021-07-01 | N/A | Submission of a letter by Trzaskoma to the Court regarding juror information. | Court | View |
| 0015-07-01 | Meeting | A telephone conference was held where the Court questioned the defendants about their knowledge o... | N/A | View |
DOJ-OGR-00009234.jpg
This document is a table of contents or index of exhibits for a legal filing dated February 24, 2012, related to the case of Conrad v. Manessis. It lists various court documents, testimony, correspondence, and affidavits filed between 2009 and 2011. Key individuals mentioned include the parties Conrad and Manessis, as well as attorneys and witnesses such as Victor M. Serby, Catherine Conrad, Susan E. Brune, and Paul H. Schoeman.
DOJ-OGR-00009232.jpg
This document is an index of exhibits for a legal filing known as the 'Trzaskoma Declaration,' filed on February 24, 2022. The exhibits consist of various personal and legal records pertaining to Catherine M. Conrad, spanning from 1998 to 2011. These records include court case documents, a marriage certificate to Frank Rosa, property records like a deed and mortgage, and criminal history information.
DOJ-OGR-00010134.jpg
This document is a page from a legal declaration or expert report authored by Stephen Gillers, an ethics expert. It analyzes a court transcript involving attorney Trzaskoma and the law firm Brune & Richard regarding their investigation of a juror named Catherine Conrad (Juror Number One). Gillers concludes that the lawyers' actions and disclosures to the court were entirely consistent with legal ethics rules.
DOJ-OGR-00010133.jpg
This document is a page from a legal analysis, likely a judicial opinion, dated April 6, 2012, concerning the conduct of defense lawyers in case 1:09-cr-00581-WHP. The author examines statements made by the lawyers in a July 8, 2011 memorandum regarding their investigation into a juror named Conrad, concluding that while the statements could lead to a false inference, they do not constitute a knowing misrepresentation or unethical behavior. The document also recounts a July 15 telephone conference where the Court questioned the defense team, represented by Trzaskoma, about their awareness of issues with the juror.
DOJ-OGR-00010131.jpg
This legal document details the events of March and May 2011 concerning the law firm Brune & Richard. The firm's lawyers, led by Trzaskoma, investigated whether a juror named Conrad was the same person as a suspended Bronx lawyer with the same name. After reviewing evidence such as voir dire answers and a Westlaw profile, they concluded the two were different people and, lacking actual knowledge or strong suspicion, had no ethical duty to disclose their findings to the court.
DOJ-OGR-00010069.jpg
This document is a page from a legal transcript where a witness is being questioned about a conversation with Ms. Trzaskoma. The discussion focused on whether Juror No. 1 could be the same person as a suspended lawyer named Catherine M. Conrad. The witness testifies that Ms. Trzaskoma, after reviewing the juror's voir dire responses, concluded they were not the same person because the answers were inconsistent with the juror being a lawyer.
DOJ-OGR-00009979.jpg
This document is a concordance (word index) page from a court transcript dated February 15, 2012, for the case 'United States of America v. Paul M. Daugerdas, et al.' (Case 1:20-cv-03088-PAE, Document 646-20). While filed within a docket often associated with Ghislaine Maxwell (1:20-cv-03088 is Giuffre v. Maxwell), the document itself pertains to the Daugerdas tax fraud case, likely serving as a legal precedent or exhibit. The index lists occurrences of words starting with 'T' (testify, Theresa, Trzaskoma, trial, truth, etc.) and their corresponding page/line numbers in the full transcript.
DOJ-OGR-00009913.jpg
This document is an index of exhibits and legal filings, primarily related to the court case 'Conrad v. Manessis'. It lists various documents such as court orders, affirmations, testimony excerpts, affidavits, and correspondence dated between February 2009 and September 2011. The index provides a chronological overview of key submissions and events in the litigation, referencing individuals like Susan E. Brune, Judge Pauley, and Victor M. Serby, as well as entities like the Federal Election Commission.
DOJ-OGR-00009912.jpg
This document is an index of exhibits (13 through 23) from a 'Trzaskoma Declaration' filed in a legal case. The exhibits consist of various legal and criminal records, including court dispositions, police records, and filings related to individuals named Catherine Conrad, Catherine Rosa, and Frank Rosa. Several exhibits pertain to the civil case 'Conrad v. Manessis' in Bronx County, New York, with filings dated between 2003 and 2009.
DOJ-OGR-00009911.jpg
This document is a table of contents for exhibits attached to a 'Trzaskoma Declaration' in a legal case. The exhibits primarily concern an individual named Catherine Conrad (also referred to as Catherine M. Conrad and Catherine Morgan Conrad) and include various legal and personal documents. These documents range from a 1998 criminal court disposition to a 2007 marriage certificate and a 2011 letter, suggesting a compilation of background information for a legal proceeding.
DOJ-OGR-00009454.jpg
This legal document analyzes statements made by defense lawyers in a memorandum regarding their investigation of a juror named Conrad. The author, likely a judge, concludes that while the lawyers' phrasing could have been clearer and may have led to unintended inferences, their statements were not knowingly false or a violation of ethical rules. The analysis specifically addresses a July 15 telephone conference where a lawyer, Trzaskoma, denied prior awareness of certain facts, a statement the author finds consistent with the lawyers' overall position.
DOJ-OGR-00009452.jpg
This legal filing (Case 1:09-cr-00581-WHP) defends the conduct of attorneys from Brune & Richard regarding a potential conflict with 'Juror Conrad.' The text details events in March and May 2011 where the legal team investigated whether the juror was actually a suspended Bronx lawyer of the same name. The attorneys concluded the two were different people based on discrepancies in addresses, education, and age, and therefore determined they had no ethical duty to disclose their suspicion to the court.
DOJ-OGR-00009390.jpg
This document is a page from a legal transcript where a witness, Edelstein, recounts a conversation with Ms. Trzaskoma. The discussion focused on whether Juror No. 1 was the same individual as a suspended lawyer named Catherine M. Conrad. Edelstein testifies that while Ms. Trzaskoma initially considered the possibility, she concluded they were not the same person after reviewing the juror's voir dire responses, which were inconsistent with being a lawyer.
DOJ-OGR-00009300.jpg
This document is a concordance (word index) page from a legal transcript dated February 15, 2012, for the case 'United States v. Paul M. Daugerdas, et al.' It was filed as Exhibit A-5696 in Case 1:20-cr-00330 (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) on February 24, 2022. The index lists words starting with 'T' (testify, Texas, Theresa, Trzaskoma, trial, etc.) alongside their corresponding page and line numbers in the original transcript. Notable entries include 'Trzaskoma' (mentioned 41 times) and 'trial' (mentioned 103 times).
Initial reaction to Westlaw profile
After seeing highlighted information from the Westlaw profile, Trzaskoma wrote an email stating, "Jesus, I do think it’s her," but later changed her mind after reviewing the full profile.
Westlaw profile
Highlighted selected information about the suspended lawyer.
Disclosure of research/internal communications
A letter addressing the Court's question regarding information on Juror Number One, disclosing the firm's earlier research.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity