Trove
Sign In Sign Up

MR. FOY

Person
Mentions
34
Relationships
14
Events
18
Documents
16
Search

Relationship Network

Loading... nodes
Interactive Network: Click nodes or edges to highlight connections and view details with action buttons. Drag nodes to reposition. Node size indicates connection count. Line color shows relationship strength: red (8-10), orange (6-7), yellow (4-5), gray (weak). Use legend and help buttons in the graph for more guidance.

Event Timeline

Interactive Timeline: Hover over events to see details. Events are arranged chronologically and alternate between top and bottom for better visibility.
14 total relationships
Connected Entity Relationship Type
Strength (mentions)
Documents Actions
organization The Court
Professional
9 Strong
4
View
person MS. LONERGAN
Professional
6
1
View
organization The Court
Legal representative
6
2
View
person Client (She)
Client
5
1
View
person co-counsel
Professional
5
1
View
person MR. FIGGINS
Business associate
5
1
View
person MS. DONALESKI
Legal representative
5
1
View
person Unnamed Client
Client
5
1
View
person Judge Ramos
Professional
5
1
View
person client (unnamed)
Client
5
1
View
person Mr. Foy's client
Professional
5
1
View
person Mr. Foy's wife and daughters
Friend
5
1
View
person TOVA NOEL
Legal representative
2
2
View
person MS. DONALESKI
Opposing counsel
1
1
View
Date Event Type Description Location Actions
N/A Court hearing A hearing was held where the court granted a motion to exclude time from the date of the hearing ... Southern District Court (in... View
N/A Trial A trial for Mr. Foy is scheduled for July. N/A View
2025-06-01 N/A Mr. Foy's Family Travel Out of the country View
2021-04-01 N/A Court Hearing Court (Southern District) View
2020-06-22 N/A Court ordered start date for proceedings. Courtroom View
2020-06-08 N/A Scheduled start of trial. Court View
2020-02-10 Court hearing A court proceeding documented in Case 1:19-cr-00830-AT, involving a heated discussion between cou... Courtroom View
2020-02-10 N/A Court hearing where a heated exchange occurred regarding scheduling. Southern District Court View
2019-12-19 N/A Court hearing/status conference (Document Filed Date) Court View
2019-12-19 Court hearing A hearing where Mr. Figgins requested a seven-day extension to secure cosigners for Mr. Thomas, a... Courtroom (implied) View
2019-12-19 N/A Court Hearing filed on this date. Courtroom (Southern District) View
2019-12-16 Court proceeding A court hearing to discuss the pretrial release conditions for Defendant Thomas and Defendant Noe... Courtroom View
2019-12-16 N/A Arraignment / Court Hearing Courtroom View
2019-12-16 Court hearing An attorney, Mr. Foy, argues before a judge (The Court) that the surrender of a firearm should no... Courtroom View
2019-08-14 N/A Service of subpoena to Tova Noel via her attorney Mr. Foy. Southern District of New Yo... View
2019-08-14 N/A Service of Subpoena Southern District of New Yo... View
2019-08-14 N/A Phone conversation regarding representation of Ms. Noel. Unknown View
0020-07-01 N/A Trial Start Date 40 Foley Square View

EFTA00032382.pdf

An email dated August 14, 2019, from an Assistant United States Attorney in the Southern District of New York to an attorney named Mr. Foy. The email confirms a previous phone conversation regarding Mr. Foy's representation of Tova Noel and serves a subpoena via attachment (2019.08.14_Tova_Noel_Subpoena.pdf).

Email
2025-12-25
Analysis Source

EFTA00027109.pdf

An email dated August 14, 2019, from an Assistant United States Attorney (SDNY) to Mr. Foy. The email confirms a previous phone conversation establishing that Mr. Foy represents Tova Noel and is authorized to accept a subpoena on her behalf, which is attached to the email. This document likely pertains to the investigation following Jeffrey Epstein's death, involving one of the guards on duty.

Email
2025-12-25
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00022017.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript dated February 10, 2020, related to Case 1:19-cr-00830-AT. It depicts a contentious exchange where the Judge ('The Court') repeatedly orders attorney Mr. Foy to sit down while Foy attempts to argue against a June 8th schedule date, citing his co-counsel's family obligations and characterizing the matter as a 'nonviolent criminal case with no mandatory jail.' The footer indicates the document is processed by the DOJ.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00022016.jpg

This document is a court transcript from February 10, 2020, capturing a tense exchange between a lawyer, Mr. Foy, and the presiding judge. Mr. Foy argues that his family's planned vacation to Italy should not be a professional issue, while the judge becomes increasingly frustrated, repeatedly ordering Mr. Foy to stop talking and sit down. The transcript highlights a breakdown in courtroom decorum and a conflict between the lawyer's personal life and the court's proceedings.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00022015.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:19-cr-00830-AT) filed on February 10, 2020. The dialogue focuses on scheduling a trial or hearing date, with attorneys Mr. Foy and Mr. Figgins discussing conflicts regarding personal family travel and vacations in June. The Court ultimately overrides Mr. Foy's objection regarding family travel arrangements, setting a start date of June 22nd and citing the attorney's obligation to represent their client.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00022014.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:19-cr-00830-AT) filed on February 10, 2020. Defense attorney Mr. Foy argues that the trial should consider the broader 'culture of the institution' and security failures at the MCC, rather than just the specific '14-hour period' alleged by the government. Foy highlights a discovery dispute, noting that of 192 existing videos, only three were provided, and of nine cameras in the SHU, only one was produced which 'shows almost nothing.' The Court orders the trial to begin on June 8.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00022013.jpg

This document is page 10 of a court transcript from Case 1:19-cr-00830-AT, filed on February 10, 2020. The Court sets a trial date for June 8 to allow for pretrial dispositions and discovery review. Defense counsel Mr. Foy expresses concern about a potential conflict with family travel planned for the end of June, to which the Judge responds that professional obligations must take priority.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00022011.jpg

This document is a court transcript from a hearing on February 10, 2020, concerning trial scheduling. An attorney argues against a lengthy adjournment, considering the trial schedule of a Mr. Foy. After attorney Ms. Lonergan estimates the trial will last less than a week, the judge sets the trial date for June 8 and establishes deadlines for a motion to dismiss for March and April.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00022006.jpg

A page from a court transcript filed on February 10, 2020, regarding Case 1:19-cr-00830-AT. Defense attorney Mr. Foy is arguing for an adjournment of proceedings, citing the need for further investigation and a scheduling conflict with another trial set to begin July 20 before Judge Ramos at 40 Foley Square. Foy notes that the other trial involves a client facing a mandatory life sentence who has been incarcerated for nearly two years.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00021990.jpg

This document is a court transcript from a hearing on December 19, 2019. An attorney, Mr. Figgins, successfully requests a one-week extension to secure cosigners for his client, Mr. Thomas, a process which requires an interview by the U.S. Attorney's Office. Subsequently, another attorney, Ms. Donaleski, requests that time be excluded from trial calculations, which the court grants under the Speedy Trial Act.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00021982.jpg

A transcript page from a court hearing filed on December 19, 2019 (Case 1:19-cr-00830-AT). Defense attorney Mr. Foy argues that 'outside circumstances' are driving the prosecution and expresses concern about receiving discovery and potential Brady material in time for an April 20 trial date. The Judge is unpersuaded and sets the trial for April 20, with Ms. Donaleski estimating the government's case will take approximately one week.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00021980.jpg

This document is page 4 of a court transcript from Case 1:19-cr-00830-AT (United States v. Tartaglione), filed on December 19, 2019. The discussion involves scheduling, specifically regarding a 'DOJ inspector general report' (likely related to the Jeffrey Epstein jail suicide investigation, as Tartaglione was Epstein's cellmate) which the defense is interested in, while the prosecution (Ms. Donaleski) argues it should not delay the case. The Court sets a control date for January 30 and a trial date for April 20.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00021970.jpg

This document is a court transcript from case 1:19-cr-00830-AT, filed on December 16, 2019. In the transcript, the presiding judge grants a motion to exclude time until November 25th to allow the government to produce discovery, which the defense counsel agrees to. The judge also advises counsel to contact Judge Torres' deputy to resolve a separate scheduling issue.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00021966.jpg

A transcript page from a court hearing (Case 1:19-cr-00830-AT) dated December 16, 2019. Defense attorney Mr. Foy argues that his female client should be allowed to retain a personal-use firearm in her home as a condition of her release, citing her full cooperation with the government since August 14th regarding an investigation and international travel. The judge questions the necessity of the firearm.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00021965.jpg

This document is a court transcript from a hearing on December 16, 2019, in case 1:19-cr-00830-AT. An attorney, Mr. Foy, is arguing that his client should not be required to surrender her personal firearm as a condition of release, citing her lack of a criminal record, the nonviolent nature of the allegation, and her legal right to possess the weapon. The court's only interjection is to ask whether the firearm is for duty or personal use.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00021964.jpg

This document is a court transcript from December 16, 2019, detailing a hearing about the pretrial release conditions for defendants Thomas and Noel. The conditions discussed include restrictions on alcohol use and mandatory mental health evaluation, as directed by pretrial services. An attorney, Mr. Foy, objects to one of the conditions, stating it was not part of a prior agreement on the terms of release.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source
Total Received
$0.00
0 transactions
Total Paid
$0.00
0 transactions
Net Flow
$0.00
0 total transactions
No financial transactions found for this entity. Entity linking may need to be improved.
As Sender
7
As Recipient
2
Total
9

Trial Scheduling and Discovery Scope

From: MR. FOY
To: THE COURT

Discussion regarding the trial date of June 8 and arguments regarding the relevance of institutional failures at the MCC versus the specific 14-hour period of the incident.

Meeting
2020-02-10
Communication Source

Scheduling / Conduct

From: MR. FOY
To: THE COURT

Mr. Foy attempts to raise objections regarding a June 8th date, citing co-counsel's vacation/family obligations and the nonviolent nature of the case.

Court proceeding
2020-02-10
Communication Source

Request for adjournment

From: MR. FOY
To: Court/Government

Referenced by speaker: 'Also, which I did not reference in my letter...'

Letter
2020-02-10
Communication Source

Trial Scheduling

From: MR. FOY
To: THE COURT

Discussion regarding the trial date set for June 8 and potential conflicts with defense counsel's travel plans.

Meeting
2020-02-10
Communication Source

Discovery and Trial Scheduling

From: MR. FOY
To: THE COURT

Defense counsel expresses concern about 'outside circumstances' driving the prosecution and the potential for Brady material affecting the timeline.

Hearing
2019-12-19
Communication Source

Surrender of firearm as a condition of release

From: MR. FOY
To: ["The Court"]

Mr. Foy argues to the court that his client should not be required to surrender her personal firearm as a condition of release. He states the allegation is nonviolent, she has no criminal history, and she legally possesses the firearm. The court asks if the firearm is for duty or personal use, to which Mr. Foy replies it is personal.

Courtroom dialogue
2019-12-16
Communication Source

Surrender of firearm as a condition of release

From: MR. FOY
To: ["The Court"]

Mr. Foy argues to the court that his client should not be required to surrender her personal firearm as a condition of release. He states the allegation is nonviolent, she has no criminal history, and she legally possesses the firearm. The court asks if the firearm is for duty or personal use, to which Mr. Foy replies it is personal.

Courtroom dialogue
2019-12-16
Communication Source

Tova Noel

From: Assistant United State...
To: MR. FOY

Confirmation that Mr. Foy represents Ms. Noel and accepts service of a subpoena on her behalf based on a prior phone conversation.

Email
2019-08-14
Communication Source

Tova Noel

From: Assistant United State...
To: MR. FOY

Confirmation of representation and service of subpoena for Tova Noel via attachment.

Email
2019-08-14
Communication Source

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity

Back to Search