Back to Network
4
Shared Docs
4
Same-Page
4 / 4
Mentions
Document Mentions (4 shared documents)
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
fice was under no obligation to consult with Jane Does 1 and 2 prior to concluding its Non-Prosecution Agreement with Epstein. For the same reason, Jane Doe's claim under § 3771(a)(2) also fails. There has been no "public court proceeding" against Epstein in the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Fl
of 2009. In light of the underlying settlements between the victims and Mr. Epstein, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that this case is CLOSED ." (D.E. 38)(emphasis in original). It is not unreasonable to believe that the instant action under the Crime Victims Rights Act was auxiliary litigation to support petit
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
fice was under no obligation to consult with Jane Does 1 and 2 prior to concluding its Non-Prosecution Agreement with Epstein. For the same reason, Jane Doe's claim under § 3771(a)(2) also fails. There has been no "public court proceeding" against Epstein in the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Fl
of 2009. In light of the underlying settlements between the victims and Mr. Epstein, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that this case is CLOSED ." (D.E. 38)(emphasis in original). It is not unreasonable to believe that the instant action under the Crime Victims Rights Act was auxiliary litigation to support petit
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
fice was under no obligation to consult with Jane Does 1 and 2 prior to concluding its Non-Prosecution Agreement with Epstein. For the same reason, Jane Doe's claim under § 3771(a)(2) also fails. There has been no "public court proceeding" against Epstein in the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Fl
of 2009. In light of the underlying settlements between the victims and Mr. Epstein, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that this case is CLOSED ." (D.E. 38)(emphasis in original). It is not unreasonable to believe that the instant action under the Crime Victims Rights Act was auxiliary litigation to support petit
Sponsored
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
fice was under no obligation to consult with Jane Does 1 and 2 prior to concluding its Non-Prosecution Agreement with Epstein. For the same reason, Jane Doe's claim under § 3771(a)(2) also fails. There has been no "public court proceeding" against Epstein in the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Fl
of 2009. In light of the underlying settlements between the victims and Mr. Epstein, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that this case is CLOSED ." (D.E. 38)(emphasis in original). It is not unreasonable to believe that the instant action under the Crime Victims Rights Act was auxiliary litigation to support petit
Sponsored
Mutual Connections (33)
Entities connected to both Jane Doe and D.E. 38)(emphasis
Jeffrey Epstein
PERSON3,169 w/ Jane·4 w/ D.E.
Bradley Edwards
PERSON1,796 w/ Jane·4 w/ D.E.
Kenneth Marra
PERSON1,618 w/ Jane·4 w/ D.E.
Paul Cassell
PERSON1,242 w/ Jane·3 w/ D.E.
Scarlett Johansson
PERSON828 w/ Jane·4 w/ D.E.
United States
LOCATION780 w/ Jane·4 w/ D.E.
the Southern District
LOCATION627 w/ Jane·4 w/ D.E.
S.J. Quinney College of Law
ORGANIZATION289 w/ Jane·2 w/ D.E.
United States District Court
ORGANIZATION280 w/ Jane·4 w/ D.E.
Ronald N. Boyce
PERSON181 w/ Jane·3 w/ D.E.
the Eleventh Circuit
ORGANIZATION178 w/ Jane·4 w/ D.E.
Brad Edwards & Associates
ORGANIZATION59 w/ Jane·4 w/ D.E.
Cynthia Nixon
PERSON49 w/ Jane·4 w/ D.E.
The Law Offices of
ORGANIZATION42 w/ Jane·4 w/ D.E.
TW
Twombly
PERSON41 w/ Jane·4 w/ D.E.
D.E.
ORGANIZATION38 w/ Jane·4 w/ D.E.
Bell Atlantic Corp.
ORGANIZATION32 w/ Jane·4 w/ D.E.
Ashcroft
PERSON30 w/ Jane·4 w/ D.E.
the Circuit Court
ORGANIZATION26 w/ Jane·4 w/ D.E.
Hayes
PERSON26 w/ Jane·2 w/ D.E.