4
Shared Docs
4
Same-Page
16 / 4
Mentions
v. Indyke, Case No. 19-cv-10475-LGS See, e.g., wants Ghislaine Maxwell to `rot in jail," NY Post (Dec. 4, 2019); Andrew Denney and Bruce Golding, "Jeffrey Epstein's no-bail ruling may encourage more accusers to come forward," NY Post (July 18, 2019) ("McCawley wouldn't identify her new clients but said she enco
ted pleadings involve Plaintiff's effort which were not and should not have been relevant to Plaintiffs false claim that she was sexually abused by Epstein as a minor. The Second Circuit in Brown itself redacted from the summary judgment pleadings and exhibits all of Ms. Maxwell's deposition answers in
o tnsealinu Sealed Materials Laura A. Menninger Jeffrey S. Pagliuca Ty Gee HADDON, MORGAN AND FOREMAN,
l the questions, lawsuit filed a lawsuit against Mr. Epstein to produce In fact, in connection with her cur
any pleading "any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter," Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f). B. Rule 15 Motion Between their two motions (the Rule 21 Motion and Rule 15 Motion), Jane Doe 3 and Jane Doe 4 assert that "they desire to join in this action to vindicate their rights [under the CVRAJ as well." (DE 280 at 1). Alt
t the respondent Government violated their rights under the CVRA by failing to consult with them before negotiating a non-prosecution agreement with Jeffrey Epstein, who subjected them to various sexual crimes while they were minors. (ILL). Petitioners initiated this action in July 2008. (a). GIUFFRE002844 EF
oin this action." a at 3, 7). Specifically, Jane Doe 3 proffers that she could prove the circumstances under which a non-party introduced her to Mr. Epstein, and how Mr. Epstein sexually trafficked her to several high-profile non-party individuals, "including numerous prominent American politicians, pow
fore negotiating a non-prosecution agreement with Jeffrey Epstein, who subjected them to various sexual cr
stances under which a non-party introduced her to Mr. Epstein, and how Mr. Epstein sexually trafficked her to
any pleading "any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter," Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f). B. Rule 15 Motion Between their two motions (the Rule 21 Motion and Rule 15 Motion), Jane Doe 3 and Jane Doe 4 assert that "they desire to join in this action to vindicate their rights [under the CVRA] as well." (DE 280 at 1). Alt
t the respondent Government violated their rights under the CVRA by failing to consult with them before negotiating a non-prosecution agreement with Jeffrey Epstein, who subjected them to various sexual crimes while they were minors. (Id.). Petitioners initiated this action in July 2008. (Id.). EFTA00210130
this action." (Li. at 3, 7). Specifically, Jane Doe 3 proffers that she could prove the circumstances under which a non-party introduced her to Mr. Epstein, and how Mr. Epstein sexually trafficked her to several high-profile non-party individuals, "including numerous prominent American politicians, pow
fore negotiating a non-prosecution agreement with Jeffrey Epstein, who subjected them to various sexual cr
stances under which a non-party introduced her to Mr. Epstein, and how Mr. Epstein sexually trafficked her to
any pleading "any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter," Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f). B. Rule 15 Motion Between their two motions (the Rule 21 Motion and Rule 15 Motion), Jane Doe 3 and Jane Doe 4 assert that "they desire to join in this action to vindicate their rights [under the CVRAJ as well." (DE 280 at 1). Alt
t the respondent Government violated their rights under the CVRA by failing to consult with them before negotiating a non-prosecution agreement with Jeffrey Epstein, who subjected them to various sexual crimes while they were minors. (Id.). Petitioners initiated this action in July 2008. (Id.). EFTA00210559
this action." (Li. at 3, 7). Specifically, Jane Doe 3 proffers that she could prove the circumstances under which a non-party introduced her to Mr. Epstein, and how Mr. Epstein sexually trafficked her to several high-profile non-party individuals, "including numerous prominent American politicians, pow
fore negotiating a non-prosecution agreement with Jeffrey Epstein, who subjected them to various sexual cr
stances under which a non-party introduced her to Mr. Epstein, and how Mr. Epstein sexually trafficked her to
any pleading "any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter," Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f). B. Rule 15 Motion Between their two motions (the Rule 21 Motion and Rule 15 Motion), Jane Doe 3 and Jane Doe 4 assert that "they desire to join in this action to vindicate their rights [under the CVRAJ as well." (DE 280 at 1). Alt
Entities connected to both Jeffrey Epstein and the Rule 21 Motion and Rule 15 Motion

Alan Dershowitz
PERSONJane Doe
PERSON
Kenneth Marra
PERSON
Virginia Giuffre
PERSONLaurie
PERSONWright & Miller
ORGANIZATIONMotion for Limited Intervention
ORGANIZATION
Herring
PERSONFederal Rule of Civil Procedure
ORGANIZATIONPrac. & Fed
ORGANIZATIONLimited Intervention
ORGANIZATIONBank of N. Am.
ORGANIZATIONthe Rule 15 Motion
ORGANIZATIONRule 21 Motion
ORGANIZATIONMotion for Leave to File Supplemental
ORGANIZATIONSupport of Motion for Limited Intervention
ORGANIZATIONBridgeport Music, Inc.
ORGANIZATION
Goston
PERSONMusic Grp.
ORGANIZATIONFoman v. Davis
PERSON