Epstein Secrets

uite 700 • Los Angeles, California 90025 • 310.477.1700 phone • 310.477.1699 fax • www.psblaw.com August 27, 2020 VIA ECF Hon. Debra C. Freeman Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse 500 Pearl Street New York, NY 10007 Re: Doe v. Indyke, et al., 1:20-cv-000484-JGK-DCF Plaintiff's Opposition Let

a related criminal prosecution has been characterized as an "extraordinary remedy." Louis Vuitton Malletier S.A. v. LY USA, Inc., 676 F.3d 83, 98 (2d Cir. 2012) (emphasis added). As a result, a civil defendant urging a stay pending a parallel criminal prosecution bears the burden of establishing its n

Plaintiff's claims against defendant Maxwell—the only actively litigated claims against her currently—to proceed in full public view. Courts in the Second Circuit recognize that the public benefits from civil litigation not only when it advances the justifiable interests of the Plaintiff, but also when the lit

es of evidence as "just noise." Horst said after the verdict that he respects the jury's decision. Jurors declined comment on their way out of the Daniel Patrick Moynihan U.S Courthouse in Lower Manhattan. Margulies is represented by Brent Horst of Horst Law. The government is represented by Negar Tekeei and Christin

. In reviewing the history of the CVRA in its 2016 decision in Federal Insurance Company v. United States of America, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit noted that because the act began as a proposed constitutional amendment, the law is "relatively sparse [in] technical detail." That lack of detail h

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT At a Stated Term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, in the City of New York, on the 28th day of July, two thousand and ten. Before: Dennis Jacobs, ChiefJ

1 Page: 1 07/28/2010 78000 1 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT At a Stated Term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, in the City of New York, on the 28th day of July, two thousand and

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT At a Stated Term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, in the City of New York, on the 28i° day of July, two thousand and ten. Before: Dennis Jacobs, Chief

ction by the Daily News of the recording. I attach the Rush declaration hereto as Ex. 3. 3 EFTA00728446 7. The Daily News then took an appeal to the Second Circuit. While the appeal was pending, however, the underlying civil suits by the three girls settled, leading to an automatic vacation of the district cou

es of evidence as "just noise." Horst said after the verdict that he respects the jury's decision. Jurors declined comment on their way out of the Daniel Patrick Moynihan U.S Courthouse in Lower Manhattan. Margulies is represented by Brent Horst of Horst Law. The government is represented by Negar Tekeei and Christin

. In reviewing the history of the CVRA in its 2016 decision in Federal Insurance Company v. United States of America, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit noted that because the act began as a proposed constitutional amendment, the law is "relatively sparse [in] technical detail." That lack of detail h

es of evidence as "just noise." Horst said after the verdict that he respects the jury's decision. Jurors declined comment on their way out of the Daniel Patrick Moynihan U.S Courthouse in Lower Manhattan. Margulies is represented by Brent Horst of Horst Law. The government is represented by Negar Tekeei and Christin

. In reviewing the history of the CVRA in its 2016 decision in Federal Insurance Company v. United States of America, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit noted that because the act began as a proposed constitutional amendment, the law is "relatively sparse [in] technical detail." That lack of detail h

urt and send a copy to Class Counsel and Defendant's Counsel, at the addresses listed below by , 2023. The Court's address is: Hon. Jed S. Rakoff, Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007; Class Counsel's address is: Boies Schiller Flexner LLP, 55 Hudson Yards, 20th Floor,

ending final approval of this Settlement no later than two business days after filing the petition. JPMC shall withdraw any pending petition before the Second Circuit within two business days of the Effective Date. 1.5 "Class Member" or "Member of the Class" means a Person who falls within the definition of the

Case 1:20-cv-00484-JGK-DCF Document 78 Filed 08/27/20 Page 1 of 6 PANISH SHEA & BOYLE, I, August 27, 2020 VIA ECF Hon. Debra C. Freeman Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse 500 Pearl Street New York, NY 10007 Re: Doe v. Indyke, et al., 1:20-cv-000484-JGK-DCF Plaintiff's Opposition Letter to

a related criminal prosecution has been characterized as an "extraordinary remedy." Louis Vuitton Malletier S.A. v. LY USA, Inc., 676 F.3d 83, 98 (2d Cir. 2012) (emphasis added). As a result, a civil defendant urging a stay pending a parallel criminal prosecution bears the burden of establishing its ne

wing Plaintiffs claims against defendant Maxwell—the only actively litigated claims against her currently—to proceed in full public view. Courts in the Second Circuit recognize that the public benefits from civil litigation not only when it advances the justifiable interests of the Plaintiff, but also when the lit

Case 1:22-cv-10019-JSR Document 248-1 Filed 10/23/23 Page 1 of 5 October 19, 2023 Hand Delivery Honorable Jed S: Rakoff Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse 500 Pearl Street Room 1340 New York, NY 10007 Re: Doe v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., No. 1:22-CV-10019 (S.D.N.Y.) Dear J

certain discrete claims asserted by the Attorney General ... does not necessarily negate the parens patriae nature of the action.").2 Courts outside the Second Circuit agree. See Illinois v. AU Optronics Corp., 794 F. Supp. 2d 845, 853 (ND. 111. 2011) ("As many courts have held, a State is not automatically rendere