Back to Network
7
Shared Docs
5
Same-Page
7 / 7
Mentions
Document Mentions (7 shared documents)
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
agreement and added: "Glad we could get this worked out for reasons I won't put in writing. After this is resolved I would love to buy you a cup at Starbucks and have a conversation." (DE 407 at ¶ 33.) On September 21, 2007, the line prosecutor emailed Epstein's counsel stating, "I think that the attache
unius est exclusio alterius, 'expressing one item of [an] associated group or series excludes another left unmentioned' the Court is not persuaded. Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Echazabal, 536 U.S. 73, 80 (2002) (quoting United States v. Vonn, 535 U.S. 55, 65 (2002)). "The force of any negative implication ... depends on
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
agreement and added: "Glad we could get this worked out for reasons I won't put in writing. After this is resolved I would love to buy you a cup at Starbucks and have a conversation." (DE 407 at ¶ 33.) On September 21, 2007, the line prosecutor emailed Epstein's counsel stating, "I think that the attache
unius est exclusio alterius, 'expressing one item of [an] associated group or series excludes another left unmentioned' the Court is not persuaded. Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Echazabal, 536 U.S. 73, 80 (2002) (quoting United States v. Vonn, 535 U.S. 55, 65 (2002)). "The force of any negative implication ... depends on
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
agreement and added: "Glad we could get this worked out for reasons I won't put in writing. After this is resolved I would love to buy you a cup at Starbucks and have a conversation." (DE 407 at ¶ 33.) On September 21, 2007, the line prosecutor emailed Epstein's counsel stating, "I think that the attache
unius est exclusio alterius, 'expressing one item of [an] associated group or series excludes another left unmentioned' the Court is not persuaded. Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Echazabal, 536 U.S. 73, 80 (2002) (quoting United States v. Vonn, 535 U.S. 55, 65 (2002)). "The force of any negative implication ... depends on
Sponsored
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
agreement and added: "Glad we could get this worked out for reasons I won't put in writing. After this is resolved I would love to buy you a cup at Starbucks and have a conversation." (DE 407 at ¶ 33.) On September 21, 2007, the line prosecutor emailed Epstein's counsel stating, "I think that the attache
unius est exclusio alterius, 'expressing one item of [an] associated group or series excludes another left unmentioned' the Court is not persuaded. Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Echazabal, 536 U.S. 73, 80 (2002) (quoting United States v. Vonn, 535 U.S. 55, 65 (2002)). "The force of any negative implication ... depends on
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
agreement and added: "Glad we could get this worked out for reasons I won't put in writing. After this is resolved I would love to buy you a cup at Starbucks and have a conversation." (DE 407 at ¶ 33.) On September 21, 2007, the line prosecutor emailed Epstein's counsel stating, "I think that the attache
unius est exclusio alterius, 'expressing one item of [an] associated group or series excludes another left unmentioned' the Court is not persuaded. Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Echazabal, 536 U.S. 73, 80 (2002) (quoting United States v. Vonn, 535 U.S. 55, 65 (2002)). "The force of any negative implication ... depends on
2 mentions
Page EFTA00010513
agreement and added: "Glad we could get this worked out for reasons I won't put in writing. After this is resolved I would love to buy you a cup at Starbucks and have a conversation." (DE 407 at ¶ 33.) On September 21, 2007, the line prosecutor emailed Epstein's counsel stating, "I think that the attache
Page: EFTA00010513 →Page EFTA00010536
unius est exclusio alterius, 'expressing one item of [an] associated group or series excludes another left unmentioned' the Court is not persuaded. Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Echazabal, 536 U.S. 73, 80 (2002) (quoting United States v. Vonn, 535 U.S. 55, 65 (2002)). "The force of any negative implication ... depends on
Page: EFTA00010536 →Sponsored
2 mentions
Page EFTA00027672
agreement and added: "Glad we could get this worked out for reasons I won't put in writing. After this is resolved I would love to buy you a cup at Starbucks and have a conversation." (DE 407 at ¶ 33.) On September 21, 2007, the line prosecutor emailed Epstein's counsel stating, "I think that the attache
Page: EFTA00027672 →Page EFTA00027695
unius est exclusio alterius, 'expressing one item of [an] associated group or series excludes another left unmentioned' the Court is not persuaded. Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Echazabal, 536 U.S. 73, 80 (2002) (quoting United States v. Vonn, 535 U.S. 55, 65 (2002)). "The force of any negative implication ... depends on
Page: EFTA00027695 →Sponsored
Mutual Connections (73)
Entities connected to both Starbucks and Chevron U.S.A. Inc.
Jeffrey Epstein
PERSON117 w/ Starbucks·9 w/ Chevron
United States
LOCATION42 w/ Starbucks·7 w/ Chevron
Bradley Edwards
PERSON32 w/ Starbucks·6 w/ Chevron
Prince Andrew
PERSON27 w/ Starbucks·2 w/ Chevron
FBI
ORGANIZATION21 w/ Starbucks·7 w/ Chevron
Barry Krischer
PERSON21 w/ Starbucks·7 w/ Chevron
Jay Lefkowitz
PERSON21 w/ Starbucks·7 w/ Chevron
Palm Beach
LOCATION26 w/ Starbucks·2 w/ Chevron
Barry Diller
PERSON23 w/ Starbucks·5 w/ Chevron
Alexander Acosta
PERSON20 w/ Starbucks·7 w/ Chevron
Kenneth Marra
PERSON20 w/ Starbucks·7 w/ Chevron
Ken Starr
PERSON19 w/ Starbucks·7 w/ Chevron
HE
Herman
PERSON15 w/ Starbucks·7 w/ Chevron
Department of Justice
ORGANIZATION18 w/ Starbucks·2 w/ Chevron
the Southern District
LOCATION15 w/ Starbucks·5 w/ Chevron
Jeffrey Marc Herman
PERSON12 w/ Starbucks·7 w/ Chevron
Michael Reiter
PERSON15 w/ Starbucks·4 w/ Chevron
Lawrence Krauss
PERSON17 w/ Starbucks·2 w/ Chevron
Palm Beach Police Department
ORGANIZATION13 w/ Starbucks·5 w/ Chevron
Miami-Dade County
LOCATION11 w/ Starbucks·7 w/ Chevron