Back to Network
9
Shared Docs
8
Same-Page
9 / 9
Mentions
Document Mentions (9 shared documents)
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
induced in part by the Non-Prosecution Agreement — such judicial action might raise additional questions about this Court's jurisdiction under the Rooker/Feldman doctrine. See, e.g., Casale v. Tillman, 558 F.3d 1258, 1260-61 (11th Cir. 2009); Powell v. Powell, 80 F.3d 464, 466-68 (11th Cir. 1996). 4
ruling in these proceedings. See, e.g., Scott v. Taylor, 470 F.3d 1014, 1018 (11th Cir. 2006) (holding t
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
e induced in pan by the Non-Prosecution Agreement - such judicial action might raise additional questions about this Court's jurisdiction under the Rooker/Feldman doctrine. See. e.g., Casale v. Tillman. 558 F.3d 1258. 1260-61 (11th Cir. 2009); Powell v. Powell. 80 F.3d 464. 466-68 (11th Cir. 1996). 4
ruling in these proceedings. See. e.g.. Scott v. Taylor, 470 F.3d 1014, 1018 (11th Cir. 2006) (holding t
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
induced in part by the Non-Prosecution Agreement — such judicial action might raise additional questions about this Court's jurisdiction under the Rooker/Feldman doctrine. See, e.g., Casale v. Tillman, 558 F.3d 1258, 1260-61 (11th Cir. 2009); Powell v. Powell, 80 F.3d 464, 466-68 (11th Cir. 1996). 4
ruling in these proceedings. See, e.g., Scott v. Taylor, 470 F.3d 1014, 1018 (11th Cir. 2006) (holding t
Sponsored
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
induced in part by the Non-Prosecution Agreement — such judicial action might raise additional questions about this Court's jurisdiction under the Rooker/Feldman doctrine. See, e.g., Casale. Tillman, 558 F.3d 1258, 1260-61 (11th Cir. 2009); Powell. Powell, 80 F.3d 464, 466-68 (11th Cir. 1996). 4 EFT
ruling in these proceedings. See, e.g., Scott I. Taylor, 470 F.3d 1014, 1018 (11th Cir. 2006) (holding t
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
induced in part by the Non-Prosecution Agreement — such judicial action might raise additional questions about this Court's jurisdiction under the Rooker/Feldman doctrine. See, e.g., Casale v. Tillman, 558 F.3d 1258, 1260-61 (11th Cir. 2009); Powell v. Powell, 80 F.3d 464, 466-68 (11th Cir. 1996). 4
ruling in these proceedings. See, e.g., Scott v. Taylor, 470 F.3d 1014, 1018 (11th Cir. 2006) (holding t
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
induced in part by the Non-Prosecution Agreement — such judicial action might raise additional questions about this Court's jurisdiction under the Rooker/Feldman doctrine. See, e.g., Casale v. Tillman, 558 F.3d 1258, 1260-61 (11th Cir. 2009); Powell v. Powell, 80 F.3d 464, 466-68 (11th Cir. 1996). 4
ruling in these proceedings. See, e.g., Scott v. Taylor, 470 F.3d 1014, 1018 (11th Cir. 2006) (holding t
Sponsored
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
induced in part by the Non-Prosecution Agreement — such judicial action might raise additional questions about this Court's jurisdiction under the Rooker/Feldman doctrine. See, e.g., Casale v. Tillman, 558 F.3d 1258, 1260-61 (11th Cir. 2009); Powell v. Powell, 80 F.3d 464, 466-68 (11th Cir. 1996). 4
dren, not the purchasers or the johns." Fierro v. Taylor, No. 11-CV8573, 2012 WL 13042630, at *3 (S.D.N.Y
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
induced in part by the Non-Prosecution Agreement — such judicial action might raise additional questions about this Court's jurisdiction under the Rooker/Feldman doctrine. See, e.g., Casale v. Tillman, 558 F.3d 1258, 1260-61 (11th Cir. 2009); Powell v. Powell, 80 F.3d 464, 466-68 (11th Cir. 1996). 4
dren, not the purchasers or the johns." Fierro v. Taylor, No. 11-CV8573, 2012 WL 13042630, at *3 (S.D.N.Y
2 mentions
Page EFTA00010478
induced in part by the Non-Prosecution Agreement — such judicial action might raise additional questions about this Court's jurisdiction under the Rooker/Feldman doctrine. See, e.g., Casale v. Tillman, 558 F.3d 1258, 1260-61 (11th Cir. 2009); Powell v. Powell, 80 F.3d 464, 466-68 (11th Cir. 1996). 4
Page: EFTA00010478 →Page EFTA00010479
f standing because Petitioners simply have no injury that is likely to be redressed by a favorable ruling in these proceedings. See, e.g., Scott v. Taylor, 470 F.3d 1014, 1018 (11th Cir. 2006) (holding that there was no standing where it was speculative that remedy that Plaintiff sought 5 Significant
Page: EFTA00010479 →Sponsored
Mutual Connections (152)
Entities connected to both Rooker and Emmy Taylor
Jeffrey Epstein
PERSON10 w/ Rooker·1,366 w/ Emmy
United States
LOCATION9 w/ Rooker·296 w/ Emmy
Marc Rich
PERSON2 w/ Rooker·293 w/ Emmy
Department of Justice
ORGANIZATION3 w/ Rooker·261 w/ Emmy
Scarlett Johansson
PERSON8 w/ Rooker·234 w/ Emmy
George Mitchell
PERSON2 w/ Rooker·201 w/ Emmy
New York
LOCATION2 w/ Rooker·183 w/ Emmy
Samantha Power
PERSON8 w/ Rooker·175 w/ Emmy
FBI
ORGANIZATION8 w/ Rooker·160 w/ Emmy
the Southern District
LOCATION9 w/ Rooker·139 w/ Emmy
Bradley Edwards
PERSON7 w/ Rooker·137 w/ Emmy
Atlanta
LOCATION9 w/ Rooker·133 w/ Emmy
Colorado
LOCATION2 w/ Rooker·139 w/ Emmy
Harry Reid
PERSON2 w/ Rooker·131 w/ Emmy
MW
Martin Weinberg
PERSON2 w/ Rooker·123 w/ Emmy
Alexander Acosta
PERSON9 w/ Rooker·113 w/ Emmy
Bernie Sanders
PERSON2 w/ Rooker·116 w/ Emmy
Harvey Weinstein
PERSON9 w/ Rooker·108 w/ Emmy
Phoenix
LOCATION8 w/ Rooker·95 w/ Emmy
JD
Jane Doe
PERSON9 w/ Rooker·88 w/ Emmy