Epstein Secrets

R,FRANKLYN P LAVERTY,ANNE M GRIFFIS,NIXON MARCUS,JEFFREY A SUMMERS,RUTH A

Y,TALBOTT B ROBERTSON JR,HARRISON M FORMAN,MARCIA L VANHELLEMONT,ROBERT W KAPN

t to the sound discretion of the trial court, a discretion to be exercised in light of the relevant facts and circumstances of the particular case." Nixon v. Warner Commtans, Inc., 435 U.S. 589,599 (1978). The panel lacks the context and familiarity with the facts, the parties and the non-parties to a

Maxwell OPhintiff DDefendant ['Appellant/Petitioner nAppeUee/Respondent MOVING ATTORNEY: Ty Gee [name of attorney, with fm. Haddon, Morgan and Foreman, P.C. v. Maxwell OPPOSING PARTY: Plaintiff OPPOSING ATTORNEY: Paul Cassell address. phone number and e-mail) S.J. Quinney College of Law at the

to exercise its sound discretion whether to seal or redact the materials "in light of the relevant facts and circumstances of the particular case," Nixon v. Warner Commc 'ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 599 (1978). II. General objections to unsealing of summary judgment materials. As an initial matter, it i

No. 18-2868 Appellee Maxwell's Response to Order to Show Cause EFTA00794214 Appellee Ghislaine Maxwell, through her attorneys Haddon, Morgan and Foreman, P.C., submits this Response to the Court's Order to Show Cause ("OTSC"). I. Objections to the Order to Show Cause. For the reasons stated in Ms.

atify private spite or promote public scandal" or "serve as reservoirs of libelous statements for press consumption." Brown, 929 F.3d at 51 (quoting Nixon v. Warner Commc'ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 598 (1978)). The Brown court held: "District courts should exercise the full range of their substantial pow

fully submitted, /s/Jeffrey S. Pagliuca Laura A. Menninger (LM-1374) Jeffrey S. Pagliuca (pro hac vice) Ty Gee (pro hac vice) Haddon, Morgan and Foreman, P.C. 150 East 10th Avenue Denver, CO 80203 1 EFTA00075005 CagealAgOat#714k0EAFierbdathiAlioRP2PilaWfittleagetticjit Pit 3 CERTIFICATE OF SERV

adioactive Material Users, Inc. v. Griepentrog, passim 945 F.2d 150 (6th Cir. 1991) 14 Mohammed v. Reno, 309 F.3d 95 (2d Cir. 2002) 13, 15, 25 Nixon a Warner Communications, Inc., 435 U.S. 589 (1978) 18, 19, 20 Nken v. Holder, 556 U.S. 418 (2009) 27 Patterson v. Colorado ex rel. Attorney Gen

nt/Petkioner DAppellet/Respondent MOVING ATTORNEY: Adam Mueller [name of attorney, with fon, address, phone number and e-mail) Haddon, Morgan and Foreman, P.C. Boies Schiller & Flexner LLP OPPOSING ATTORNEY: Sigrid McCawley Court- Judge/ Agency appealed from: Hon. Loretta A. Preska, District Judge

as the potential to exacerbate these harms to privacy and reputation by ensuring that damaging material irrevocably enters the public record. 9 Nixon v. Inisner Commc'ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 598, 98 S.Ct. 1306, 55 L.Ed.2d 570 (1978). 10 See notes 46-47 and accompanying text, post. We therefore

olland & Knight LLP, Miami, FL, for Intervenors-Appellants Julie Brown and Miami Herald. Ty Gee (Adam Mueller, on the brief), Haddon, Morgan and Foreman, P.C., Denver, CO, for Defendant-Appellee Ghislaine Maxwell. Paul G. Cassell (Sigrid S. McCawley, Boies Schiller Flexner LLP, Ft. Lauderdale,

ere a U.S. district and appeals court are actively considering the unsealing of "confidential" materials simultaneous with the criminal prosecution. Nixon v. Warner Commc'ns, 435 U.S. 589 (1978), is the closest, yet even there, the U.S. Supreme Court refused press access to the tapes obtained from thi

Haddon, Morgan and Foreman. P.c Jeffrey Paglluca II A D D O N M OR G A N FOREMAN 303.832.2628 August 24, 2020 VIA EMAIL The Honorable Alison J. Nathan United States Di

s' responsibility to exercise these powerful tools. We also caution the public to critically assess allegations contained in judicial pleadings. 9 Nixon v. Warner Cotnmens, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 598 (1978). 1° See notes 46-47 and accompanying text, post. 10 EFTA00092317 A. Standard of Review When

Holland & Knight LLP, Miami, FL, for Intervenors-Appellants Julie Brown and Miami Herald. TY GEE (Adam Mueller, on the brief), Haddon, Morgan and Foreman, P.C., Denver, CO, for Defendant-Appellee Ghislaine Maxwell. 3 EFTA00092310 PAUL G. CASSELL (Sigrid S. McCawley, Boies Schiller Flexner LLP, F

ated that in deciding whether to unseal materials it was important to give weight to the impact on a criminal defendant's right to a fair trial. In Nixon v. Warner Communications, Inc., 435 U.S. 589 (1978), a number of media moved the district court to release audio tapes admitted into evidence in the

0 Honorable Loretta A. Preska United States District Court Southern District of New York 500 Pearl Street New York, NY 10007 Haddon, Morgan and Foreman, r.0 Ty Gee 150 East 10th Avenue Denver, Colorado 80203 PH 303.831.7364 HI 303.832.2628 www.hmtlaw.com [email protected] Re: Reconsideration of

and early '70s, he advised President Richard M. Nixon on taking the United States off the gold standard

shift. She stayed and worked I 2am•tiam as O1. Prior to 8/9 she had not worked OT since 8/3. Thomas - His regular schedule is as a Warehouse Worker Foreman and this is a M-F 8-4 job. He worked OT on 7/30. 8/6. 8/7. 8/9. and 8/10. His OT is a ›.» 8/12/2019 9:29 AM >>> -Cturent Overall Staffing 84.86%